[Intl-tobacco] Stub out the smoking habit - Japan Times

[Robert Weissman]

Stub out the smoking habit - Japan Times

Monday, November 24, 2003By KIROKU HANAI

The Tokyo District Court has rejected a damage suit filed against Japan
Tobacco Inc. and the national government by seven former smokers who
said they developed cancer and other health troubles from long years of
smoking. The suit, filed by victims of lung cancer, cancer of the larynx
and emphysema, charged that JT failed to inform consumers of the health
risks of smoking and the state failed to take effective measures to
restrict smoking. The suit, which also demanded damages and a
restrictions on cigarette sales, was the most important among 17
tobacco-related damage suits filed in Japan since 1980.JT, owned 66.74
percent by the Finance Ministry, is a de facto national enterprise.
There was a widespread perception among the plaintiffs and their
grass-roots supporters that it would be difficult to win the suit, but I
was shocked by the callous ruling, which I believe was one of the worst
court judgments in Japanese legal history.

Yoshiro Isayama, chief counsel for the plaintiffs, said it was a
"political ruling."

In November 2002, half a year before the hearings were to end, something
unimaginable in democratic Japan happened when the presiding judge, a
nonsmoker, was replaced by a smoker. If the replacement was unavoidable,
a nonsmoker should have taken over so that the impartiality of court
proceedings was not jeopardized.

In rejecting the suit, the court said:

* Health risks of smoking are widely recognized by the public.

* Nicotine dependency is not as strong as alcohol dependency and is not
so strong as to deprive smokers of their will to kick the habit.

* The health warning printed on cigarette packages was prepared on the
basis of recommendations by a government advisory panel and is serving
its purpose to a certain extent.

The ruling, while saying health risks of smoking are common knowledge,
fails to take into account the fact that JT has consistently made
efforts to divert smokers' attention from harmful effects.

It took the court more than five years to issue the ruling, as JT
refuted epidemiological studies indicating a causal link between smoking
and cancer, while plaintiffs argued that smoking caused lung cancer and
other diseases.

The ruling downplayed nicotine dependency, but there are many Japanese
businessmen who chain-smoke while working. It cannot be argued that
nicotine dependency is less serious than alcohol dependency. The ruling
totally ignores the results of medical and epidemiological research.

The health warning on Japanese cigarette packages -- "Please take care
to avoid excessive smoking since it could damage your health" -- has
been criticized internationally as ineffective.

Under the Framework Convention on Tobacco Control adopted last May by
the World Trade Organization, the Finance Ministry belatedly decided to
have a stronger health warning printed on cigarette packages. The new
warning will be more specific, saying smoking causes, or heightens the
risks, of lung cancer, cardiac infarction, stroke and emphysema.

The ministry has tolerated the vague warning concealing serious health
risks of smoking on the basis of recommendations by an advisory body
made up of tobacco-industry officials and retired ministry bureaucrats.
The court vaguely said that the present warning is serving its purpose.
This is outdated and undermines the fairness of a court decision.

A reading of the new warning shows that the court ruling was mistaken.
The presiding judge was likely to have been incapable of making a fair
judgment due to his nicotine dependency.

Four of the seven plaintiffs who filed the suit have died. They sought
damages of 10 million yen each but they had more interest in
restrictions on tobacco sales, a ban on cigarette ads and stronger
health warnings on cigarette packages. Experts say Japan is 30 years
behind other industrial nations in restricting smoking.

Yet the court failed to pay attention to the plaintiffs' plight. Many
people had hoped -- in vain -- that the ruling would include a message
for a healthier Japan. The ruling, which tolerated negligence by the
government and JT, was 100 percent backward-looking.

Meanwhile, the government last May grudgingly implemented the Health
Promotion Law to restrict smoking at public places, in the face of
growing global antismoking moves, including the Framework Convention on
Tobacco Control. However, the law does not provide punishment for
violations and has no teeth. The guidelines for restricting smoking at
workplaces, revised also last May, do not ban smoking outright but
requires the segregation of smokers from nonsmokers.

The health warning on cigarette packages will be revised for the first
time in 14 years, but tobacco companies will not be required to print
the new label on cigarette packages until June 2005. The European Union
introduced severe warnings for smokers beginning in September, which
says smoking kills and causes premature death.

The Japanese law banning smoking by minors, hailed as a major
accomplishment by Meiji Era lawmakers, has been rendered useless by the
proliferation of cigarette vending machines.

The court is the last legal resort for changing improper public health
administration distorted by pressure of cigarette manufacturers, vendors
and nicotine addicts. I am hoping that the Tokyo High Court, in response
to an appeal by the plaintiffs, will make a wise decision.

Kiroku Hanai is a former editorial writer for a vernacular newspaper.

http://www.japantimes.co.jp/cgi-bin/geted.pl5?eo20031124kh.htm