[Intl-tobacco] FCTC passes World Health Assembly!

[Robert Weissman]

World cracks down on Big Tobacco
A treaty adopted Wednesday launches a global push to regulate tobacco
products.

By Ron Scherer
Christian Science Monitor
Wednesday, May 21, 2003
http://www.csmonitor.com/2003/0522/p01s04-wogi.html

NEW YORK - In Hong Kong, the dance CDs put out by Marlboro could soon
disappear. In Vietnam, umbrellas with "Salem attitude" painted across
them may be sent to the trash. The cafes in Kiev that sport the Camel
logo will probably have to change their names. And forget about those
ads for Philip Morris super lights attached to airline tickets in the
Czech Republic.

These are just some of the ways the advertising and marketing of tobacco
may be about to change. Wednesday, in a landmark move, health officials
from 192 nations unanimously approved a global health treaty - the first
of its kind - that could change the face of the global tobacco industry.

To slow the spread of smoking, especially in poor nations, where smoking
rates are soaring, the World Health Organization in Geneva voted for
unprecedented and potentially deep restrictions on tobacco products.

The accord must still be implemented by governments worldwide, which
must pass laws regulating everything from the size of health warnings
(no less than 30 percent of the size of a pack) to restrictions on
secondhand smoke.

It could mean some nations will ban the terms "light" or "low tar" as
misleading. It encourages higher taxes to prevent children from smoking.
And all those slick marketing efforts - from slinky models in magazines
to sponsorship of race cars - could be history.

"This treaty has the potential to save literally tens of millions of
lives over the next 25 years," says Matthew Myers, president of the
Campaign for Tobacco-Free Kids.

The treaty, called the Framework Convention on Tobacco Control (FCTC),
is controversial within the tobacco industry itself. Altria, the parent
of Philip Morris, says it is in favor of the new treaty. "What we hope
and expect is that this treaty can be a catalyst in every country that
signs on for meaningful and effective treatment of tobacco," says Mark
Berlind, associate general counsel for Altria.

But British American Tobacco, the parent of US-based Brown & Williamson,
said in a statement it had "mixed" views of the treaty. The British
company likes the strong provisions against smuggling and counterfeiting
of cigarettes. But, it denounces the ban on advertising since it says
consumers will not be able to get information on potentially safer
cigarettes under development.

The treaty has been under negotiation for the last three years. During
much of that time, the US was perceived as being against a tough
crackdown. Kathryn Mulvey, executive director of In fact, an activist
nongovernmental organization that lobbied for passage of the FCTC,
termed the US position as "obstructionist."

By Saturday, the US was the last holdout and finally decided to back the
treaty. Wednesday, at the WHO in Geneva, Tommy Thompson, secretary of
health and human services, said "This is an outstanding day when you can
stand up and make a step forward for public health."

President Bush, a spokesman says, will carefully review the treaty
before making decisions.

"But our preference to sign a strong and effective treaty has not
changed," says Allen Abney, a White House spokesman.

If President Bush signs the treaty, he will forward it on to the US
Senate, which must ratify it. Then Congress would have to pass
implementing legislation. The US successfully inserted language that
exempts nations from implementing the treaty within constitutional
limits. The US Supreme Court has ruled that certain forms of tobacco
advertising are constitutionally protected as free speech. "The treaty
is intended for countries to have flexibility for regulations and to
retain sovereignty for basic policy decisions," says Mr. Berlind, who
hopes the treaty starts a national debate over tobacco regulation.

Philip Morris, for example, agrees with its critics that legislation is
the main way to effect change. Wednesday antitobacco forces sustained a
major blow in their attempt to litigate change when a Florida appeals
court overturned a $145 billion class-action verdict against tobacco
companies. It said ill smokers in what is known as the Engle case could
proceed individually. "We have always maintained the way to resolve
issues of concern is through legislation, not litigation," says Berlind.

The WHO treaty is vague about suing tobacco companies. There is nothing
mandatory, only a provision that lets each country decide on the basis
of their own laws what to do about liability.

Some skeptics doubt the US will ratify the treaty, which includes
requirements like warning labels that cover almost one-third of a
cigarette pack and a provision that states' public health takes priority
over commercial interest. British American Tobacco, in its statement,
says the treaty "sets a precedent that could in future affect many other
industries, such as alcohol and fast food."

If those industries and others perceive the treaty that way, lobbying in
Washington will be intense. "This will be one more treaty the US does
not ratify," says Clyde Prestowitz, author of a new book, "Rogue
Nation," and president of the Economic Strategy Institute in Washington.
"The US has spent a lot of effort and lot of time trying to open markets
to tobacco."

According to the WHO, there is an urgent need for the treaty. The
organization estimates there are now about 1.1 billion smokers. "In the
absence of a strong treaty like this, the estimate is that the number of
smokers will rise to 1.6 billion smokers in 20 years," says Myers.

Many of those smokers could face difficult health problems. WHO
estimates nearly 5 million smokers die from smoking-related causes each
year. By 2020, it is estimating, that will grow to 10 million people, 70
percent of them from developing countries. "This treaty is the closest
thing we have to a vaccine against tobacco caused death in the
developing world," says Myers.