It was 1995 and BAT had reason to be satisfied, as Davis made clear: “In Mauritius, Uganda and Malawi, for instance, we effectively have a 100 per cent market share, and our share in Kenya is around 92 per cent.” But it was not enough. “It [Africa] represents immeasurable wealth, and it’s frustrating for Africa that these resources have never been exploited,” said Davis. “There is no lack of opportunities. It is up to us to grasp them.”¹

For a long period, BAT was barely challenged in Africa by other tobacco multinationals or local rivals. Its presence stretches back more than a century, first as an importer and then as a manufacturer of local and international brands. By 1980 it had subsidiaries and affiliates in 12 countries and licensed manufacturers in a further five. It had the leading brands in Ghana, Kenya, Malawi, Nigeria and Sierra Leone and strong performers in Libya, Somalia, Sudan and Uganda. Nonetheless, this only provided 4% of the company’s total turnover.²

Hand in hand with that market expansion came a corrupting influence on governments across the continent. BAT has used its economic muscle to keep tobacco control measures to a minimum. Anyone getting in its way, whether tobacco competitors or health campaigners, have found themselves facing the full might of this colonial giant.³⁴⁵

As Matthew L Myers, president of the Campaign for Tobacco-Free Kids, told the Guardian newspaper in 2017:

“British American Tobacco sees fragile states as one of the few remaining growth markets for its deadly products. For a company that doesn’t care how it makes its money or what laws need to be broken to ensure future profits, countries experiencing instability present a unique opportunity.”⁶

It is clear that BAT treats countries in Africa primarily as markets to be exploited rather than independent sovereign states. Find out more about BAT’s exploitation in Africa using this interactive map:

On this page we examine British American Tobacco’s malign corporate influence in South Africa in particular.

Historically, British American Tobacco South Africa (BATSA) has been the largest manufacturer and distributor in the country. However, in the last decade that dominance has come under attack from local brands. The country is not the biggest market in the continent, but it is one of the wealthiest and has political and economic influence over much of southern Africa. To be dominant in South Africa is to also be very well-positioned in the region.

“We will disrupt the enemy. We will destroy their Warehouses. We will blow up their supply lines.”

It can be too easy to reach for military metaphors when discussing business activities. However, in the case of BAT in South Africa, this was a war. It involved security staff from the UK and ex-policemen from South Africa. It used surveillance and apparent bribery. It used, military style language. As one subcontractor tasked with disrupting BAT’s competition put it: “We need to work as a unit, lean mean fighting machine. We will disrupt the enemy. We will destroy their Warehouses. We will blow up their supply lines.”⁸

And as with any war there are casualties. Every year an estimated 25,000 to 42,000 people in the country die from tobacco related diseases.⁹

In protecting its trading position, BAT used its Anti-Illicit Trade (AIT) Division. This was meant to crack down on smuggling and counterfeiting. Instead, the team looked to disrupt competitors. In South Africa they turned to a company called Forensic Security Services (FSS) for the particularly dirty work.¹⁰ They also used members of the South African police departments charged with enforcing the law objectively to target rival tobacco firms.

Back in 2002, competitor Apollo Tobacco accused BATSA in court of colluding with state officials and operatives at BAT’s service provider, FSS, of “industrial espionage.” The head of Apollo, Hennie Delport, accused BATSA and FSS of breaking into his offices and planting listening devices in order to disrupt Apollo’s operations.¹¹ BATSA denies the allegations which have yet to be determined in court.

Twenty years on there is evidence to suggest BAT was engaged in similar corporate espionage on an industrial scale via FSS. One senior FSS personnel member said that, under BATSA and BAT’s orders, FSS undertook a “systematic campaign of maximum disruption to the production plants and business”.¹² That meant using surveillance to monitor shipments, infiltrate factories and warehouses, plant tracking devices, recruit informers and liaise with law enforcement to order bogus stops and seizures.

“All the people at FSS were ex-Apartheid managerial positions.”

Many FSS employees were veterans of the notorious Apartheid police department, Reaction Unit 9, which was infamous for “questionable shootings” and brutal force. As the ex-FSS employee turned whistleblower Francois Van Der Westhuizen would later tell the BBC: “All the people at FSS were ex-Apartheid managerial positions. All of them had links, direct links back to certain factions within the police, within law enforcement, within the revenue service. So it was just the old guard continuing.”¹³

Directing them were UK BAT personnel. They had ‘burner’ phones and travelled under aliases when visiting South Africa to brief and train operatives.¹⁴¹⁵

The BAT operation comprehensively penetrated the South African law enforcement community. FSS also obtained physical access to Johannesburg Metropolitan Police Department’s CCTV control room, allowing it to monitor 240 cameras, including one in particular positioned outside competitor Carnilinx’s offices.¹² BAT was part of the state’s Tobacco Task Team set up to fight the growth of illicit trade.¹⁶ BAT’s relationship with the police meant it could manipulate the Tobacco Task Team, providing intelligence to guide where it wanted the police to act. In return FSS got access to classified police material including personal data on officials at rival companies.

As a Government Commission of Inquiry would later say to the Task Team: “The one thing the Tobacco Task team did not investigate was the illicit trade in cigarettes, but investigated instead the investigators who once investigated that trade”.¹⁷ “For all this effort, one would imagine that between BAT and FSS they would have had some astonishing successes pinning criminal charges on their competitors. They didn’t—and that was apparently not the goal anyway. The goal seems to have been to simply to disrupt them to taunt them.”¹⁸ notes ex-South African Revenue Service official Telita Snyckers in her book Dirty Tobacco: Spies, Lies and Mega-Profits. South African state efforts to control illicit tobacco had effectively become a division in BAT’s corporate armoury.

Not only did BAT target rival companies but the BAT informant ring also infiltrated organized crime groups, including Pakistani, Mozambiquan and Zimbabwean syndicates. FSS whistleblower Francois Van Der Westhuizen has described how he got “illegal sources on board” including from the South African “mafia.” The whistleblower alleged that one sensitive source was a notorious crime boss: “He’s an underworld figure that ran the South African police system at this stage,” adding, “I was dealing with him on behalf of BAT. I had to debrief him to get intelligence from him.”¹³

The South African operation did not stop at the borders. Tobacco shipments went into Mozambique, Swaziland, Botswana, Namibia, Angola, Zimbabwe and Zambia, so the informants followed them. Meanwhile, South African operatives were flown over to the UK to be wined, dined and briefed. They were joined on at least one occasion by a South African Police Service captain. And the paperwork describing the system of payments used to fund this spy network suggests BAT was also sending agents to Latin America.¹⁹

From its London headquarters at Globe House, BAT operated a continent-spanning informant network to pursue its economic interests. Globe House sits barely a mile away from where another global corporation was founded on similarly aggressive lines, authorised in its founding charter to wage war and which maintained its own army and navy. In doing so the East India Company “[transformed] itself into an aggressive colonial power.”²⁰, stripping India and the Caribbean of its wealth over several centuries to benefit shareholders in London. And it did so with the tacit approval of the UK government which, at best, looked the other way and at worst was complicit in the exploitation.

BAT is following in that colonialist tradition.

Author

Phil Chamberlain

Further Reading

BAT Uncovered

British American Tobacco in South Africa: Any Means Necessary

Buying Influence and Advantage in Africa: An Analysis of British American Tobacco’s Questionable Payments

TobaccoTactics Resources

The BAT Files

South Africa Country Profile

British American Tobacco

TCRG Research

R.R. Jackson, A. Rowell, A.B. Gilmore, “Unlawful Bribes?”: A documentary analysis showing British American Tobacco’s use of payments to secure policy and competitive advantage in Africa, 13 September 2021, UCSF: Center for Tobacco Control Research and Education.

References

The post British American Tobacco: Dirty Deeds in Africa appeared first on TobaccoTactics.

Tactics range from the exploitation of farmers and use of child labour to threats and intimidation, and a “continent-spanning spy network”. All to pursue BAT’s own commercial goals.

Examples from across the region feature on an illustrative map, and below are links to further reading which provide a comprehensive understanding of the company’s activities in Africa.

Sabotage, Deceit and Duplicity: British American Tobacco Uncovered

Significant new reports and briefings can be found on the BAT Uncovered micro-site of TCRG’s partner organisation STOP at exposetobacco.org

These cover new allegations of bribery across Africa, and dirty tricks in South Africa.

Briefing papers on BAT’s alleged capture of state agencies, potential complicity in smuggling in South Africa and alleged connection to an attempted bribery conspiracy in Zimbabwe will be published on this site in due course.

Buying Influence and Advantage in Africa

Analysis of whistleblower documents by the Tobacco Control Research Group (TCRG) at the University of Bath found a “large number of questionable payments” made by BAT over a five-year period.  This huge international corporation used these payments to influence policy and undermine competing tobacco companies, both international and local.

• Read the report summary: Buying Influence and Advantage in Africa: An Analysis of British American Tobacco’s Questionable Payments

BAT made payments impacting ten countries in East and Central Africa. They were made to politicians and civil servants, staff of competitor companies, journalists, farmers and others involved in positions of potential influence.  The use of these payments appeared to be systematized and supported by senior staff, including in BAT’s London office.

The full report details the payments and describes the serious consequences of this unethical business activity. It also suggests that governments globally should more closely examine BAT’s behaviour.

• Read the full report: “Unlawful Bribes?”: A documentary analysis showing British American Tobacco’s use of payments to secure policy and competitive advantage in Africa²¹

The leaked source documents are publicly available in the UCSF Industry Documents Library Africa Collection (University of California, San Francisco).

Dirty Tricks in South Africa

In the report on British American Tobacco in South Africa, TCRG researchers explain how BAT has fought to maintain its dominance of this key market over decades, in the face of increased competition and growing illicit trade. The report describes how the company has used “any means necessary” to hold its position, including paying another company to run a “massive secret surveillance and informant network in Southern Africa on behalf of BAT”.

The report details BAT’s use of third party service providers, allegedly overseen and run by senior operatives at BAT’s London headquarters.  It also explains how BAT is “yet to face meaningful consequences for its actions either in the region or at home in the U.K.” after the U.K. Serious Fraud Office (SFO) dropped its five-year investigation in January 2021.

BAT has repeatedly denied accusations of corporate espionage, corruption and law-breaking,²² but new analysis of leaked documents raises serious questions about BAT’s activities in South Africa, particularly in relation to tobacco smuggling and tax evasion.

The research by the TCRG was carried out in collaboration with BBC’s Panorama, The Bureau of Investigative Journalism and the Organized Crime and Reporting Project.

• Read the report: British American Tobacco in South Africa: Any Means Necessary

See also:

The BBC’s Panorama documentary programme, broadcast on 13 September 2021, which “unveils new revelations about the corrupt practices deployed by one of Britain’s biggest companies.”²³

• Watch ‘Dirty Secrets of the Cigarette Business’ (BBC iPlayer, UK only, registration required)
• Watch on BBC World Saturday 18 September 2021 (Africa link, switch to other regions at the bottom of the page, note times are GMT)

The Bureau of Investigative Journalism

• Read: Smoke Screen: BAT’s agents brokered bribe proposal²⁴
• Listen: Smoke Screen: Love, bribes, lies and spies in the tobacco industry

Victoria Hollingsworth tells the true story of corrupt practices behind the scenes at British American Tobacco. Hear from the very people caught up in this world as the Bureau sinks deep into the dirty underbelly of the tobacco industry in South Africa.

BAT in Africa: A History of Double Standards

TobaccoTactics details the history of BAT’s double standards, exposing a difference between its stated goals and principles, and its activities in low and middle-income African countries.  It includes links to earlier allegations against BAT, featured in a 2015 Panorama programme and media coverage at the time.

• See British American Tobacco in Africa: A History Double Standards

This page brings the story up to date…

• See British American Tobacco in Africa: Continuing Allegations of Misbehaviour

References

The post The BAT Files: How British American Tobacco Bought Influence in Africa appeared first on TobaccoTactics.

What is waterpipe?

Waterpipe has different names in different countries such as narghileh, shisha, hookah, hubble-bubble, or goza.

The World Health Organization (WHO) defines waterpipe tobacco smoking (WTS) as “a form of tobacco consumption that utilizes a single or multi-stemmed instrument to smoke flavoured or non-flavoured tobacco, where smoke is designed to pass through water or other liquid before reaching the smoker”.²⁵ Some countries have developed their own definition of waterpipe tobacco smoking (WTS).²⁶

The origin of WTS is somewhat unclear. In the late 19th century, it was popular among older men in the Middle East but with the introduction of sweetened and flavoured tobacco in the early 1990’s, waterpipe use surged among youth, and expanded globally, through universities and schools.²⁷²⁸

Social acceptability of waterpipe use has increased, due to the growth of ‘café culture’ in the Middle East and globally, becoming the focus of social gatherings of young people, as a waterpipe can be shared by a group of friends over an extended time, with a slow puff rate. Tourists have taken the waterpipe habit back to their countries, and expatriates from the Middle East have opened waterpipe cafés and restaurants around the world.^25282930In this way waterpipe has spread beyond the Middle East and become integrated into the global tobacco market.³¹ While there are restrictions on tobacco advertising in other regions, products have been promoted throughout the Middle East via satellite television, internet and social media. As these media are largely unregulated the industry is able to circumvent most advertising bans (see below for more on product regulation).²⁹³⁰²⁵

Transnational tobacco company interests

Historically, transnational tobacco companies had little interest in waterpipe tobacco smoking. A review of tobacco industry documents showed no focus on waterpipe tobacco or its accessories, except for some ‘waterpipe-inspired’ products that did not become mainstream in the market.³²

This was the case until  2012, when Japan Tobacco International (JTI) acquired Egyptian company Al Nakhla.³³ At the time Al Nakhla was globally the largest company manufacturing waterpipe tobacco products.³⁴ However, even this was perceived as a strategy to enhance the sale of cigarettes.³²

In 2019, Philip Morris International (PMI) filed a patent ‘Shisha device for heating a substrate without combustion.’³²  However, as of 2023, this product had not yet appeared on the market.

• See Waterpipe market below for details on companies, brands and market shares

Use

Image 1: Waterpipe device (Source: Waterpipe Briefing, National Centre for Smoking Cessation and Training/Jawad et al 2013)³⁵³⁶

Waterpipe tobacco is smoked using a device like that in image 1. As the smoker draws from the mouthpiece, a piece of lit charcoal heats the waterpipe tobacco leaf within the head of the apparatus. This heat generates smoke that travels through the device’s body and enters the water-filled bowl. By inhaling through the hose attached to the top of the bowl, the smoker pulls the smoke through the water, resulting in bubbles, before finally inhaling the smoke via the mouthpiece. Typically, the head is filled with flavoured and sweetened, and it is separated from the charcoal by a perforated aluminium foil. While the specific design and characteristics may vary across different regions, the fundamental principle remains consistent: the smoke is filtered through water.²⁹

E-hookahs or e-shisha or hookah pens are not waterpipe devices as they do not involve burning charcoal. These are classified as electronic nicotine devices, similar to e-cigarettes, where a sweetened liquid is electrically heated creating an aerosol to be inhaled.²⁵

• For more information on e-cigarettes and other product types see Tobacco Industry Product Terminology

The role of flavour

The traditional type of waterpipe tobacco smoking (WTS) uses unflavoured types of leaf (Ajami, Tumbak, or Jurak). However, since the 1990s flavoured tobacco has become more popular.²⁹³⁰²⁵

The most common type is Maasel (or Mo’assel), or ‘honeyed’ tobacco, which consists of one-third tobacco and two-thirds honey and fruit flavours, usually a combination of tobacco, molasses, glycerine and fruit flavours.³⁷. A review looking at waterpipe use in the USA, Canada and the UK has shown that young adults use waterpipe mainly for its appealing flavours, always preferring it over other tobacco products.³⁸  A study among , adults in Lebanon indicated that the introduction of novel tobacco flavours contributed to people initiating WTS and increased its use.³⁹ Similarly, a study from Iran indicated that the wide variety of flavours has as well contributors to the increase in prevalence of smoking among youth and women. The different flavours were considered ‘tempting’.⁴⁰

• For information on the appeal of flavoured tobacco products see Flavoured and Menthol Tobacco

Health effects

Evidence shows that waterpipe, like other tobacco and nicotine products, is addictive.⁴¹

As with cigarettes and rolling tobacco the smoke of waterpipe is toxic and carcinogenic. One study identified 27 known or suspected carcinogens. ⁴²As a waterpipe is often shared, it is also a mode of transmission for communicable diseases, a particular concern during the COVID-19 pandemic.⁴³ Consequently, waterpipe has both  short-term and long-term harmful health impacts on people who use it, and additional harms for those exposed to second-hand smoke.^25444546

Among many groups of users there is a belief that the smoke of waterpipe is filtered in water, making it less harmful than cigarette smoking. This perception has contributed to a growing popularity and acceptance.²⁹³⁰²⁵ For example research from the UK found that:

“[w]aterpipe was perceived to be safer than cigarette smoking due to the pleasant odour, fruity flavours, and belief that water filtered the toxins.”⁴⁷

However, waterpipe contains similar or greater levels of toxic substances, leading to the same cellular effects as conventional products, leading to pulmonary and arterial diseases.⁴²⁴⁸

Prevalence

A 2018 systematic review, which included 129 studies from 68 countries, found that use of waterpipe was highest among adults in the Eastern Mediterranean region (EMR). However, among youth, prevalence was similar in Europe and EMR. Comparing WTS between adults and youth, globally the study reveals that smoking is higher among youth.⁴⁹

A WHO advisory note about waterpipe, published in 2015, indicated that although waterpipe smoking was traditionally associated with the Eastern Mediterranean region, Southeast Asia and Northern Africa, its use is growing globally among youth and adults of both genders. Use is particularly increasing among schoolchildren and university students. Research reported in the WHO advisory note ³⁰ and a study from Lebanon indicates that the shape, colour and size of the apparatus contributed to the popularity of WTS product mainly among women.⁵⁰

Africa

Research in South Africa from 2012, shows that 20% of poor high-school students reported using waterpipe daily, and 60% reported ever having used one.⁵¹ A study in Western Cape from 2013, reported higher figures: 40% current use, and 70% ever use.⁵² Even among medical students, use may be relatively high; a study in Pretoria in 2010 found that nearly 20% of participants had used a waterpipe at some time.⁵³

The Americas

Although there is limited research on waterpipe in Latin America, some has been conducted in the United States (US) and Canada. In US a national study of 104,434 university students, published in 2014, shows that after cigarette smoking, waterpipe smoking was the most frequent form of tobacco use (8.4%, compared to 29.7% for cigarettes), and over 30% reported using waterpipe at some time.⁵⁴ In Canada, although cigarette smoking among young people had significantly decreased, waterpipe use increased by 2.6% among young people between 2006 and 2010.⁵⁵

Eastern Mediterranean

This region has the highest prevalence of waterpipe use. Studies (1999 – 2008) suggest that waterpipe use was more frequent than cigarette smoking among children aged 13–15 in most countries of the region.⁵⁶ It also increased in multiple countries, with prevalence ranging from 9% to 15%.⁵⁷

Europe

Evidence compiled in 2012 showed that, among people aged 15 years or over, 16% had tried waterpipe at least once. Studies suggest waterpipe prevalence ranging from 35-40% in Latvia, Estonia, and Lithuania, but below 10% in Malta, Spain, Portugal, and Ireland. Use was growing sharply in Austria, the Czech Republic and Luxembourg.⁵⁸ In England, data from 2013 indicated that for people aged 16-18 the level of waterpipe smoking was low, at 3%.⁵⁹

However, a study looking at adult smoking in England using a nationally representative cross-sectional survey found that since then pipe, cigar or waterpipe smoking increased five times – from around 150, 000in 2013 to over 770, 000 in 2023. Cigars was the most used of the three product types, closely followed by waterpipe, and the increase was higher among young adults.⁶⁰.

South-East Asia

Studies (2008 – 2011) suggest that waterpipe prevalence among men was just over 1% in Bangladesh, and in India, and much lower in in Indonesia and in Thailand (0.3%). Fewer than 1% of women use waterpipe in India Bangladesh,  Indonesia, and Thailand.⁶¹⁶² However, waterpipe “hookah” bars and restaurants are becoming increasingly common and are most often frequented by young people.

Western Pacific

Waterpipe is called “bong” and is different in design from the popular Middle Eastern waterpipe, and therefore is often not included in waterpipe studies. It can be made of bamboo, metal or glass and is used in China, the Lao People’s Democratic Republic, Myanmar, and Vietnam. In 2010 in Vietnam around 13% of males aged or over 15 used bong.⁶¹

Regulation

In many higher income countries, waterpipe products are exempted from tobacco control policies. In many lower income countries, even if there is a policy, enforcement is very weak. Although flavouring is a major factor in the appeal to young people, flavour bans often do not cover waterpipe tobacco products. Consequently, the use of waterpipe has increased globally, largely unchecked.^29302528

The WHO Framework Convention on Tobacco Control (WHO FCTC) identifies tobacco products as “products entirely or partly made of the leaf tobacco as raw material which are manufactured to be used for smoking, sucking, chewing or snuffing”.⁶³ This definition covers waterpipe tobacco products. WHO FCTC issued COP decisions specifically for waterpipe tobacco control:

• At COP3 in 2008, Parties were invited to consider introducing health warnings and messages on tobacco packages, including waterpipe, and to use innovative measures requiring health warnings and messages to be printed on instruments used for waterpipe smoking.⁶⁴
• At COP6 in 2014, Parties were invited to strengthen the implementation of WHO FCTC on waterpipe, including conducting surveillance of its use and research on its market. This decision also invited the Secretariat of the Convention to work with the WHO to support countries in waterpipe control.⁶⁵
• At COP7 in 2016, more detailed instructions were given to Parties, including to ban the use of flavourings in waterpipe tobacco products.⁶⁶
• At COP8 in 2018, there is a decision on the implementation of Articles 9 and 10 of the WHO FCTC (Regulation of contents and disclosure of tobacco products, including waterpipe, smokeless tobacco and heated tobacco products), including the establishment of an expert group to examine the reasons for low implementation of Articles 9 and 10 of the Convention.⁶⁷

The full list of articles covering waterpipe are listed in the Fact sheet: Waterpipe tobacco smoking & health.²⁵

In January 2016, the Secretariat of the WHO FCTC signed a Memorandum of Understanding with The American University of Beirut making it the global knowledge hub for WTS, in particular with respect to education, research, and the dissemination of information that contributes to the implementation of the Convention. ⁶⁸

In 2018, the WTS knowledge hub submitted a report to the WHO FCTC COP8 that summarized Parties’ regulations concerning waterpipe.⁶⁹ This report was updated in 2022, and found that, of the 90 countries reviewed, over half (47) had policies relating to waterpipe.²⁶ The majority of policies, nearly 45%, were in Europe and around 21% in EMR.²⁶

For up-to-date information on tobacco regulation, see the Tobacco Control Laws website, published by the Campaign for Tobacco Free Kids (CTFK).
Information on progress by parties can be found in the FCTC Implementation database.

During the COVID-19 pandemic in 2020, many countries temporarily banned the use of waterpipe as part of their efforts to stop the spread of the infection.⁴³ In EMR alone, 17 countries banned waterpipe tobacco use in public places.⁷⁰

Waterpipe, along with heated tobacco products, had been exempted from the EU flavour ban, stipulated by the 2014 European Tobacco Products Directive (TPD) and implemented in 2020. A new directive was issued in 2022 and came into force in 2023. This removed the exemption, bringing regulation of these products in line with cigarettes and hand rolled tobacco.⁷¹⁷² This means that waterpipe tobacco with a “characterising flavour” can no longer be sold legally in the EU. For more information see Menthol Cigarettes: Industry Interference in the EU and UK.

Waterpipe market

According to advocacy group It’s Still Tobacco, the region with the largest global market share of WTS is the Middle East and Africa (MENA), a range estimate for the two years2016-2017 to be 54% to 69% in.⁷³

The WTS market is still concentrated in the Middle East and Africa, followed by  Europe.⁷⁴ Market analysis company Valuates estimated that as of 2022 the global WTS market was worth over US$ 800 million, forecast to nearly double by 2029.⁷⁴

Market research company Euromonitor International publishes data on waterpipe, as part of the broader pipe tobacco category. It is therefore hard to estimate global market shares specifically for waterpipe tobacco. However, it is possible to identify specific waterpipe brands in the data. In 2022, JTI held the largest share with Al Nakhla, making up nearly 13% of the entire pipe tobacco market, followed by Al Fakher and Eastern brands (including Moassel) at around 12% and 8% respectively.⁷⁵

Tobacco industry interference

The waterpipe industry is multidimensional, composed of both tobacco and non-tobacco actors, including third parties. Interference can therefore be less obvious, making it difficult to develop effective WTS policy.⁷⁶ However, there is some evidence of the tactics used by the industry and its allies.

Tobacco industry tactics used to interfere with and undermine regulation relating to waterpipe include:

Use of third parties

The third-party technique includes creating, funding and empowering allies and front groups.

The public representation of the WT industry primarily revolves around the hospitality sector (waterpipe cafes, bars, and restaurants).⁷³ Products are promoted online by users via social media, rather than WT companies.⁷³  A study from Lebanon indicates that, following the passage of the tobacco control law, enforcement of a ban on indoor smoking came to a halt due to the lobbying of policy makers by establishments where waterpipe was available.⁷⁷

In 2012, the hospitality sector in Lebanon commissioned Ernst & Young (now EY) to evaluate the effects of the smoke-free law on their financial revenue and impact on employment.⁷³⁷⁸

Spreading misleading information

Waterpipe companies have published misleading information, including on the risks of tobacco products.

A study of 16 company websites indicated that most (n=12) published misleading marketing information This was mostly prominent among non-MENA companies (n=8) compared to MENA companies’ websites (n=4).   Several companies in Jordan (Al-Rayan, Al-Tawareg, Al-Waha, and Mazaya) were found to have disseminated misleading information on the quality and safety of WTS.⁷³  WTS charcoal companies in particular published misleading information about charcoal being ‘100% natural’ and ‘free of chemicals’.⁷³

Another study looking at marketing materials at a European trade fair,  and from the MENA region, found the prevailing message was that waterpipe is less risky compared to cigarettes.⁷⁹

Industry science

Al Fakher Tobacco Trading LLC, the second largest WT company, has a ‘shisha science’ section on its website and publishes its own research. A poster of a study published on its page indicates that the paper was presented at the CORESTA Smoke Technology Conference, in 2019. The study argues that a comparisons of Total Particulate Matter (TPM) yields between waterpipe and cigarettes do not provide meaningful information to inform an assessment of relative risk of its products.⁸⁰

For information on science websites of transnational tobacco companies, see:

• Industry Approaches to Science on Newer Products

Illicit trade

Although cigarettes form most of the illicit tobacco trade, there is some evidence of illicit trade relating to waterpipe, specifically in the Eastern Mediterranean and South-East Asian regions.⁷³²⁵.

Research from Turkey indicates that the majority (up to 99%) of waterpipe tobacco is illicitly traded, reflecting the significance of the informal economy in the waterpipe tobacco market.⁸¹ The illicit products are from both unauthorized domestic production, and increasingly tobacco smuggled from other countries, reported to taste better than locally manufactured products.⁸²

OLAF, the European anti-fraud office, has identified suspicious shipments of waterpipe tobacco heading into Europe. In 2022, OLAF detected a truck carrying 20,000 kg of waterpipe tobacco as it was leaving Türkiye on its way to Denmark.⁸³

Tax evasion

There have been some documented cases of the under reporting of imports and exports of waterpipe tobacco, in order to evade tax.

In 2022, New Zealand changed its taxation law related to WTS to base it on product weight rather than the content declared by importers, as the customs authority suspected that some importers had been under-declaring tobacco content in order to avoid paying tax. ⁸⁴

In 2023, the Mozambique the tax authority seized two containers of waterpipe tobacco, reporting the lack of a proper declaration for taxes and other customs fees.⁸⁵

Relevant Links

• WHO FCTC Knowledge Hub for Waterpipe Tobacco Smoking
• Virginia Commonwealth University Center for the Study of Tobacco Products video Addressing the Myths of Hookah

TobaccoTactics Resources

• Eastern Mediterranean Region
• Industry product terminology
• Japan Tobacco International

TCRG Research

Waterpipe tobacco smoking (WTS) control policies: global analysis of available legislation and equity considerations,  H. Alaouie, R.S. Krishnamurthy, M. Tleis, L. El Kadi, R.A. Afifi, R. Nakkash, Tobacco Control, 2022, 31(2):187-197. doi: 10.1136/tobaccocontrol-2021-056550

References

The post Waterpipe appeared first on TobaccoTactics.

The FSFW is an ostensibly independent scientific organisation aimed at ‘accelerating the end of smoking’ which is solely funded by Philip Morris International (PMI). The Foundation has asserted that by funding these research centres it “aims to develop the next generation of leaders and institutions that will accelerate the end of smoking”.⁸⁸

Two of the research centres have direct links to the tobacco industry. Visit the Foundation Grantees page for full details on all its grants.

New Zealand: Centre of Research Excellence on Indigenous Sovereignty & Smoking

The first research centre funded by the FSFW was the Centre of Research Excellence: Indigenous Sovereignty & Smoking (COREISS) based in Auckland, New Zealand. COREISS was set up by Dr. Marewa Glover, a Māori public health academic and advocate for social justice and tobacco harm reduction. COREISS’ mission is to “support indigenous aspirations to flourish as individuals, families, tribes and nations who are recognized as sovereign people”.⁸⁹ FSFW’s grant of US$978,449 was awarded to COREISS on 30 May 2018 and aimed at building “a global centre for smoking cessation and harm reduction in indigenous people”.⁸⁶ As of May 2019 only US$489,225 had been paid out.⁸⁶ By August 2019, this total had risen to US$1,798,829, with US$7,320,042 committed in future funding.⁸⁷ The first FSFW-funded COREISS output was a report published in May 2019 and called “Quantifying Māori spend on tobacco, alcohol & gambling”.⁹⁰ It summarised the tobacco, alcohol and gambling tax burden of the Māori population. Glover has long claimed that tobacco tax increases unfairly target Māori and Pasifika groups,⁹¹⁹² “take money from the poor”,⁹¹ do not work,⁹³ and push smokers to the illicit market.⁹¹ Some of these claims are arguments echoed by the tobacco industry.

Contrary to Glover’s claim, tobacco tax is a well-evidenced and effective tobacco control policy tool. (See also: Price and Tax). A 2019 World Bank report concluded that tobacco taxes have effectively reduced smoking prevalence in countries with various levels of economic and institutional development and only play a minor role in illicit trade.⁹⁴

Glover has been criticised by NGO Hāpai Te Hauora Māori Public Health and a group of Indigenous public health experts from New Zealand, Canada, US and Australia for accepting (albeit indirectly) tobacco industry money and thereby legitimising the FSFW and PMI.⁹⁵ Writing in Tobacco Control, the Indigenous health leaders state that the tobacco industry will “use the Foundation to meet its agenda which is in stark contrast to the health and well-being agendas of Indigenous peoples” and that “co-optation of Indigenous culture” must be resisted. They add that the tobacco industry has a history of exploiting and appropriating Indigenous culture to sell and promote commercial tobacco. They also assert that the debate around next generation products and their potential to improve Indigenous health should be led by Indigenous peoples and not be influenced by organisations linked to the tobacco industry.⁹⁵

Italy: Center of Excellence for the Acceleration of Harm Reduction (CoEHAR)

In May 2018 the FSFW awarded US$130,559 to ECLAT SRL, “a spin off of the University of Catania”,⁹⁶ towards the “center of excellence for the acceleration of harm reduction (CoEHAR)”.⁸⁶ By May 2019, this total had risen to US$8,036,493, with US$22,928,186 committed in future funding by FSFW.⁸⁷

The CoEHAR was set up in March 2018 by tobacco harm reduction advocate Riccardo Polosa, who has a history of undertaking consultancy work for the tobacco industry. For example, in 2017 he was awarded a research grant of nearly a million Euros from PMI to investigate its heated tobacco products (HTP).⁹⁷ In 2018, he consulted for British American Tobacco (BAT) on three clinical trials for HTP and e-cigarettes, via Swiss-based consultancy firm Health Diplomats led by Delon Human.⁹⁸ For more information, go to our pages on CoEHAR and Riccardo Polosa.

Scotland: Centre of Excellence in Behaviour Research Related Smoking Cessation

The FSFW awarded US$96,063 in May 2018 to the Centre for Substance Use Research (CSUR), based in Glasgow “to develop a centre of excellence in behaviour research related to smoking cessation”.⁸⁶ As of May 2019 US$92,941 had been paid out.⁸⁶ The Centre did not receive further funding from FSFW in 2019.⁸⁷

Neil McKeganey founded the Centre for Drug Misuse Research at the University of Glasgow in 1994 to carry out research on Scotland’s drug problem. Its projects were funded by UK research councils and the UK government, among others. In 2011, the Centre became entirely independent of the University⁹⁹ and was renamed the Centre for Substance Use Research (CSUR) in November 2015.¹⁰⁰ In 2016, the University confirmed it was not in any way affiliated with the CSUR and McKeganey no longer held any position there, honorary or otherwise.¹⁰¹ On its website the CSUR describes itself as “a specialist agency undertaking research within the substance use field within the U.K., E.U., and the U.S.”.¹⁰²

CSUR has previously received funding from tobacco companies including PMI, BAT, and Fontem Ventures, a subsidiary of Imperial Brands.¹⁰³ In 2014 McKeganey helped BAT oppose the introduction of Plain Packaging in the UK. McKeganey prepared a 82 page report for BAT which was included in BAT’s submission to the UK’s second public consultation on plain packaging in 2014.¹⁰⁴¹⁰⁵ In the report, McKeganey supports BAT’s view that there is no evidence to suggest that plain packaging will reduce smoking prevalence, and that packaging is not “a factor that influences people’s decisions to start, stop, or re-start smoking”.¹⁰⁴¹⁰⁵

In May 2016, dismissing the legal challenges to the UK’s plain packaging legislation brought by the big four tobacco companies, the High Court of Justice’s ruling criticised McKeganey’s findings and the methodology they were based on:¹⁰⁵

“What I find unacceptable is the preparation of a report which by its total refusal to engage with any of this contramaterial simply conveys the impression that it does not exist and that the best way to refute it is to ignore it. Yet, at the same time and inconsistently, Professor McKeganey accepts that the principles of transparency and openness are “foundational tablets of the scientific enterprise”. Had Professor McKeganey confronted head-on the contrary evidence, including that from the tobacco companies, then it is hard to see how he could have advanced the opinions that he did; at the very least he would have been compelled to provide a proper rationale for why his opinion could be sustained in the light of this inconsistent evidence.”

More recently, McKeganey and CSUR have been working for e-cigarette company JUUL Labs, in which tobacco giant Altria has held a majority share since December 2018. In March 2019 JUUL Labs promoted a study by CSUR (funded by JUUL) which found that the JUUL e-cigarettes “dramatically” cut adult smokers’ cigarettes consumption.¹⁰⁶¹⁰⁷

Malawi: Centre for Agricultural Transformation

In July 2018 the Foundation launched a request for proposals up to the grant amount of US $10 million to establish a Centre for Agricultural Transformation (CAT) in Malawi.¹⁰⁸ According to expression of interest documents, the CAT aims to support smallholder Malawian farmers in diversifying their incomes and livelihoods to reduce their reliance on tobacco farming. The Centre stated that it would achieve this through the development and implementation of new technologies, partnerships and income opportunities.¹⁰⁹ In an operations statement released in May 2020, the Foundation outlines the CAT’s delivered and planned activities which aim to “Promote and accelerate the use of digital technologies and advanced data analytics to accelerate agricultural transformation in Malawi”.¹¹⁰ As of May 2020 it is still to appoint a director.

For more information see Centre for Agricultural Transformation.

Other Centres Funded by FSFW

South Africa: African Centre of Excellence for Smoking and Mental Health

In May 2018 the Foundation awarded the University of Cape Town’s (UCT) Department of Psychiatry & Mental Health US$70,800 to set up an African Centre of Excellence for Smoking and Mental Health.⁸⁶ The Principal Investigator on the grant was named as clinical psychologist Dr Adele Pretorius.¹¹¹ In May 2019, the FSFW recorded that it had paid out US$24,517 to UCT.⁸⁶ In October 2019, UCT’s Research Office confirmed that the grant had come to an end and that a policy was being put in place to disallow further funding from the tobacco industry.¹¹²

United States: Behavioral Psychology Centre of Excellence

In December 2018, the Foundation awarded the Florida-based Fox Foundation US$59,910 to scope out the possibility of a Behavioral Psychology Centre of Excellence.⁸⁶ The Fox Foundation describes itself as a “non-profit corporation whose mission is to identify, develop and implement economically sustainable solutions for smoking cessation and other problems that can be addressed through behavior modification.”¹¹³ The Fox Foundation did not receive further FSFW funding in 2019.⁸⁷

According to documents filed in February 2019 in the State of Florida,¹¹⁴ the Foundation’s chairman is Vaughn Volpi and its directors are Geoff Comrie and Charles Roe.

Vaughn Volpi is President for Tampa-based security company Pica.¹¹⁵ The “principle office address” for the Fox Foundation, as of 9 February 2019, is W. Gandy Blvd, which matches the address of Pica’s Tampa office.¹¹³¹¹⁶

Volpi’s biography at Pica’s website states that his areas of expertise include “intellectual property investigations and program management, global network and intelligence management, Internet fraud and security and undercover investigations”.¹¹⁵ He was previously the Co-Chairman of an anti-counterfeiting organisation, the International Anticounterfeiting Coalition (IACC) Investigators Committee.¹¹⁵ In June 2019, the IACC website stated that amongst its members were PMI, Japan Tobacco International (JTI), and JUUL Labs.¹¹⁷ Pica was not listed as a member.

India: Center of Excellence

In May 2018 the Foundation awarded Metaform Ventures LLC US$100,000 to develop a proposal to establish a Center of Excellence in India.⁸⁶ Metaform is a venture capital company registered in Pleasanton, California and documents filed with the State¹¹⁸ show it was registered in September 2017 and the Chief Executive is Jain Nilesh. It invests in technology companies and has increasingly looked at start ups in India.¹¹⁹

It is unclear what the focus of this Research Centre will be. In November 2018, Nilesh said in an interview with NewsBarons that:

“Healthcare in India is plagued for multiple reasons like poor infrastructure, lack of medical professionals in the semi urban and rural locations and the cost of medical treatment. Technology can play a major role in providing real time quality healthcare solutions across locations to a majority of our population who do not have access to basic healthcare facilities”.¹²⁰

The FSFW 2019 tax return reported US$446,411 paid to Metaform in 2019, with US$1,041,625 committed in future funding.⁸⁷

India: Center of Excellence on Harm Reduction Science

In May 2018, the Foundation awarded US$67,600 to the P.N. Srivastava Foundation For Scientific Education & Research in Shillong, for a “Detailed Project Development for Establishment of a Center of Excellence on Harm Reduction Science.”⁸⁶ It is unclear whether the funding is connected with Metaform’s project in India or is a separate venture. In May 2019, only US$33,800 had been paid out, with no funding awarded in 2019.⁸⁶⁸⁷

The Foundation appears to have only been registered the same month it was awarded the grant and has no apparent other income.¹²¹ The website given as its address on documents filed with the local government does not work. The address appears to be the Department of Biochemistry at North-Eastern Hill University (NEHU) in Shillong. The three trustees are Rajeshwar Nath Sharan, Rajendra Prasad and Prabodh Jhingan. The Trustees appear to be all affiliated with NEHU. Jhingan retired from the university in 2011 after 35 years in its Cultural & Creative Studies Department.¹²² Sharan is Professor at Department of Biochemistry and Director of Design Innovation Center at the university.¹²³

On 31 May 2019, a paper allegedly written by Rajeshwar Sharan, Konstantinos Farsalinos, and Christopher Russell (Deputy Director of CSUR) and named ‘The Prospects of e-cigarettes in India: Overview of Evidence, Opportunities and Challenges Based on Experiences in Western Countries’ was press released by an Indian media outlet.¹²⁴¹²⁵ The key message relayed was that “it is imperative that India learns from the experience of other countries, and provide tobacco users with a less harmful alternative, rather than prohibiting e-cigarettes and missing out on an unprecedented opportunity to help adult smokers in India”.¹²⁵ That same day, the Indian Council of Medical Research (ICMR), the government’s research arm, launched its White Paper on e-cigarettes which concluded that the products “have a net negative impact on public health”, and recommended a “complete prohibition on ENDS or e-cigarettes in India in the greater interest of protecting public health” and that the products .¹²⁶

TobaccoTactics Resources

• Foundation for a Smoke-Free World
• Foundation for a Smoke-Free World People
• Foundation for a Smoke-Free World: Research Database
• COREISS
• CoEHAR
• Centre for Agricultural Transformation

References

The post Foundation for a Smoke-Free World Centres of Excellence appeared first on TobaccoTactics.

Yusuf Abramjee is a South-African journalist, who works on tobacco, crime and tax stories, among other issues. He has been a freelance reporter since 1994 but in 2018 he became Vice-President of Crime Stoppers International, with focus on illicit trade and counterfeit goods, particularly tobacco smuggling. He chairs Crime Stoppers International’s media committee (see below).¹²⁷¹²⁸

• Take Back the Tax spokesperson (2018-on going)
• Vice-President for Crime Stoppers International (2018-on going)
• Head of Global Communications for Crime Stoppers International (2015-2018)
• Interpol ‘Turn Back Crime’ Ambassador (2014 –current)¹²⁹

Links to the Tobacco Industry

Yusuf Abramjee is the spokesperson for #takebackthetax, an initiative funded by the Tobacco Institute of Southern Africa (TISA).¹³⁰ Although TISA maintains it is an organization “representing the common interests of the entire South African tobacco industry, both locally and globally”,¹³¹ its members are predominantly the big tobacco companies such as British American Tobacco, Philip Morris International, Japan Tobacco International and Imperial Brands (previously Imperial Tobacco). #TakeBackTheTax is an initiative to combat the illicit trade of cigarettes in South Africa. Abramjee became the spokesperson for this initiative in 2018.

A website has been created for the Take Back the Tax initiative that contains an online petition that reads:
“I, ________Implore the South African Revenue Service, the Parliament of the Republic of South Africa and law enforcement agencies to act with urgency and take decisive steps in combating the trade of illegal cigarettes. By doing so we will stop the South African economy from losing R8 billion in potential tax revenue every year. I ask that the aforementioned parties conduct thorough investigations into claims of tax evasion by all cigarette manufacturers, to implement and enforce new laws to mitigate the negative impact that illegal cigarettes have on low-income communities.”¹³²

This website, as well as the Twitter account @TakeBackTheTax, describe it as a TISA initiative (see above).The petition raised over 23,000 signatures from end of July 2018 to May 2019, with no expected deadline.¹³³ The initiative’s narrative on Twitter and other social media channels, as well as in the petition, reflect a number of tobacco industry tactics and arguments around illicit trade of cigarettes. It argues that the loss of revenue due to unpaid taxes on illegal tobacco could put 10,000 jobs in farming at risk.¹³⁴

Gold Leaf Tobacco Legal vs Yusuf Abramjee

In February 2019, the tobacco company Gold Leaf Tobacco (GLT) sued Yusuf Abramjee for defamation regarding claims he had made about the company and tax evasion. Yusuf Abramjee made numerous statements about GLT avoiding taxes and being involved with the illicit trade of cigarettes in South Africa.¹³⁵ On his website, Abramjee claims that “GLTC has a lot to answer for when it comes to the illegal cigarette trade (…)My comments about Gold Leaf and RG have all been true and very much in the public interest”. ¹³⁶ GTL has always denied the tax evasion and illicit trade statements made by Abramjee. The case was struck off by a judge in March 2019 for “not being urgent”.¹³⁷

GTL is a member of the Fair-Trade Independent Tobacco Association (FITA), an organization composed of the smaller tobacco companies, which has been at loggerheads against TISA for years.¹³⁸ FITA released a press statement after the court ruled in favour of Abramjee stating that the organisation had “warned the public at large to view campaigns such as the #TakeBackTheTax campaign with the necessary caution as they are being funded by big tobacco manufacturers in their pursuit to try and influence government policy in respect of tobacco legislation.”¹³⁹

Links to International Organizations

Interpol

“Turn back crime” is a global awareness campaign launched by INTERPOL in 2014. The initial topic for the campaign was illicit trade and counterfeiting of commercial goods.¹⁴⁰ The initiative’s main hashtags are #turnbackcrime and #TogetherWeCan. The main website for Turn Back Crime is not available anymore, but can be accessed through the web archive. ¹⁴¹  South African news articles from 2014, report that Yusuf Ambramjee was designated one of Interpol’s ‘Turn Back Crime’ Ambassadors, along with other celebrities as actor Jackie Chan and football player Lionel Messi, to support global crime fighting initiatives around the world.¹⁴²

Crime Stoppers International

Crime Stoppers International (CSI) says it is a “global non-profit organization representing seven regions committed to support law enforcement efforts to prevent and solve crime by mobilizing citizens to anonymously report illegal activity”.¹⁴³ On its website, under the section on illicit trade, it describes a collaboration between Crime Stoppers and the tobacco industry as a “success story”. This initiative, called ‘Denuncie Hoy’ (Report Today), focused on illicit cigarette trade in El Salvador, Central America, and was expected to expand to Guatemala.¹⁴⁴ Yusuf Abramjee has been collaborating with CSI since 2007, when he was working and later heading the initiative called Crime Line. This consists of an online platform for anonymous tips on crime in South Africa.¹⁴⁵ Abramjee became Head of Global Communications for CSl in 2015 and later, in 2018, was promoted to Vice-President.

TobaccoTactics Resources

For more information, see:

• Industry Arguments Against Plain Packaging
• Arguments and Language
• Online Strategy
• South Africa- Country Profile

References

The post Yusuf Abramjee appeared first on TobaccoTactics.