Clear The Air News Tobacco Blog Rotating Header Image

June, 2012:

Alberta officially files $10B tobacco lawsuit

Jun 10th, 2012
by Editor.
No comments yet

http://www.edmontonjournal.com/news/Alberta+officially+files+tobacco+lawsuit/6754600/story.html

EDMONTON – Alberta officially sued big tobacco for $10 billion Friday, following through on a promise made last month to launch one of the province’s largest-ever legal actions.

The lawsuit, filed in the Court of Queen’s Bench in Calgary, is meant to recover the estimated costs of delivering health care to Albertans who smoked or chewed tobacco.

The 35-page statement of claim lists “breaches of duty” such as “deliberately designing tobacco products to be highly addictive,” “deceiving Albertans” by misrepresenting the extent to which tobacco products are addictive, minimizing the dangers of second-hand smoke, presenting certain products as less harmful, and specifically targeting children and teenagers as potential customers. Among the breaches of duty, the lawsuit charges companies have been responsible for “concocting and perpetuating a fallacious controversy as to whether there was a real health risk.”

The defendants have not yet filed statements of defence.

The provincial government’s statement of claim lays out historic “particulars of conspiracy,” which include meetings that took place and publications and letters issued in the early 1950s, all of which contributed to an argument that cigarette smoke was not a proven cause of lung cancer. The historic case speaks further to work done internationally and in Canada throughout the latter half of the 20th century to muddy the science around the health effects of smoking and second-hand smoke.

To argue tobacco organizations should be responsible for paying back health care service costs, the province lists a number of tobacco-related diseases, including lung cancer, heart disease, chronic bronchitis and emphysema, bladder cancer, throat cancer, kidney cancer, mouth cancer, pancreatic cancer, cataracts, low bone density, reduced fertility, stomach cancer, uterine and cervical cancer, liver cancer, and “overall diminished health and increased risk of morbidity and mortality.”

According to the statement of claim, “Albertans exposed to tobacco products would not have been exposed … or at least not to the same extent” had companies not misrepresented the dangers of tobacco use.

Quebec announced its own $60-billion lawsuit Friday, basing its estimates on the cost of treating smoking-related illnesses from 1970 through to 2030.

Five other provinces have filed similar lawsuits — British Columbia, Ontario, New Brunswick, Newfoundland, and Manitoba.

Phone calls to the Canadian Tobacco Manufacturers Council, Imperial Tobacco and JTI-MacDonald were not returned Friday afternoon.

In a statement issued Friday, Imperial Tobacco vice-president Donald McCarty characterized Quebec’s lawsuit as a hypocritical cash grab.

“Governments have licensed us, have taxed us and our consumers, and have regulated us, all in full knowledge of the risks associated with tobacco use,” McCarty said. “This lawsuit is a cash grab by a provincial government looking to score political points while conveniently forgetting that it has been a senior partner in the tobacco industry for decades.”

The statement said provincial governments have made more money in taxes than the companies themselves have earned, and called the lawsuit a waste of taxpayers’ money.

Fourteen defendants are named in the lawsuit, including: the Canadian Tobacco Manufacturers Council, Imperial Tobacco Canada Ltd., Canadian JTI-MacDonald Corp., Toronto-based Rothmans, Benson & Hedges Inc.; U.S.-based companies Altria Group, Philip Morris International, R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Co.; and United Kingdom-based British American Tobacco and Carreras Rothmans Ltd.

Click here to read the lawsuit.

taudette@edmontonjournal.com

With files from The Canadian Press

© Copyright (c) The Edmonton Journal

http://www.edmontonjournal.com/6751904.bin?size=620x400

Stub out tobacco donations to political parties, health activists say

Jun 10th, 2012
by Editor.
No comments yet

Bindu Shajan Perappadan  http://www.thehindu.com/news/national/article3509760.ece?css=print

Share

Concern for public health goes up in smoke

India’s leading cigarette manufacturer, ITC Ltd, made financial contributions of Rs. 6.78 crore in the last two years to all major political parties in the country, causing public health activists here to question the possible interference of tobacco companies “in the Central government’s efforts to bring in tougher anti-tobacco laws in the country.”

Figures disclosed by ITC Ltd — and released recently by activists as part of their campaign against tobacco — note that the company paid the Indian National Congress (Rs. 3 crore), the Bharatiya Janata Party (Rs. 2.50 crore), the Samajwadi Party (Rs. 0.42 crore), the Rashtriya Janata Dal (Rs. 0.33 crore), the Dravida Munnetra Kazhagam ( Rs. 0.22 crore), the Shiv Sena (Rs. 0.17 crore) and the Nationalist Congress Party (Rs. 0.14 crore) in the last two years (2010-2011).

“What does it mean when India’s largest cigarette manufacturer donates money to all the major political parties in the country? It means that it is trying to enhance its trade and dilute any policies that the political parties might bring in to curb its sales and profit. We are opposed to this conflict of interest and in this case the main casualty is public health,” said Amit Yadav, lawyer with the Public Health Foundation of India, a non-government organisation working in the area of tobacco control.

“Besides this, the World Health Organisation’s Framework Convention on Tobacco Control (FCTC) — a global health treaty that India ratified in February 2004 — requires that signatories in setting and implementing their public health policies with respect to tobacco control should act to protect these policies from commercial and other vested interests of the tobacco industry in accordance with national law. This is as per Article 5.3 of the FCTC,” said Bhavna Mukhopadhyay, executive director with non-government organisation Voluntary Health Association of India.

Responding to the allegations, ITC’s corporate communications vice-president Nazeeb Arif says, “Article 5.3 of FCTC does not say anything about donations from ‘tobacco’ firms. You may also note that FCTC is not the law of the country.” He adds: “ITC, like other responsible corporate, has made contributions to political parties in a transparent manner.”

Mr. Yadav concedes that “there isn’t anything illegal about what the company is doing” but says the fact that “the government is taking money from ITC also goes against its talk of trying to bring more stringent tobacco control policies.”

Pointing the rampant abuse of tobacco and its rising health ramifications, health activist and Mumbai Tata Memorial Hospital’s leading cancer surgeon Dr. Pankaj Chaturvedi said: “It is for the government to take a stand here and refuse monetary help from organisations [Indian or foreign] that deal with goods detrimental to public health. You can’t have the goodwill and monetary help of the tobacco industry and form policies against them. The practice is not illegal it is just unethical. Here we aren’t targeting only one organisation. The government has to take the side of public health and work for the common man.”

“The Central government is now actively looking into the question of government firms investing in tobacco companies,” said a senior health official who, however, refused to comment on political parties getting money from tobacco manufacturers. As on March 31, 2011, five of the top ten shareholders of ITC were government insurance companies including the Life Insurance Corporation of India.

Mr. Arif, however, insists criticism of ITC is misplaced. “In India, cigarettes constitute only 15 per cent of tobacco consumed — the rest comprising chewing tobacco, beedis etc — but contribute to more than 75 per cent of taxes from this sector. There is also evidence of a nexus between international cigarette companies and organised smuggling, especially in developing countries. Such growth in the illegal industry in cigarettes robs the national exchequer of potential taxes apart from offering inferior quality products. India now ranks 6th globally in cigarette illicit trade [domestic illegal and contraband] and has one of the highest growth rates which increased by 58 per cent over the period 2004- 2009 while the world market witnessed a decline of 4.2 per cent over the same period. As per industry estimates, revenue losses on account of this are estimated to be Rs. 3,000 crore per annum. The creation of strong Indian cigarette brands has succeeded in curtailing the huge inflow of smuggled foreign cigarettes into the country,” he argues.

He notes that if tobacco control is the objective, then duty-free sales of cigarettes need to be banned as they enable the unscrupulous diversion of such cigarettes into the domestic market, once again robbing the Indian exchequer of taxes as well as the Indian farmers of their livelihoods.

beware serpents offering free commercials : Anti-Smoking Video

Jun 9th, 2012
by Editor.
No comments yet

Dear HK NGO’s

beware serpents offering ‘free’ commercials : Anti-Smoking Video

Big Tobacco funded attempted infiltration by their advertising agency ?

You decide…………………….

From: Kok Keong Chow [mailto:kokkeong.chow@tbwa.com]
Sent: 09 June, 2012 00:17
To: James Middleton
Subject: Re: FW: Anti-Smoking Video

Dear James,

We, TBWA “Malaysia” lost JTI early this year and we do have GSK NiQuitin at the moment. Advertising agency loses and wins clients in fast pace, there’s no permanent client in this industry.

Apology, I am not so sure about other clients in other TBWA offices around the world.

However, advertising agency do provide free advertising for some clients or organisations, just named a few here – Unicef, WWF, SPCA and other non-profitable organisation. As long as it is for good cause, we do support them without charging any fees. Not so sure in the other part of the world, but we really do it in most Asia countries such as Malaysia and Singapore.

The reason being why I approached NGO in Hong Kong because the video contains Chinese culture and Malaysia is a multi-racial society which may not be appropriate for this ad.

Well, thank you for your precious time, I understand your concerns about other TBWA offices and their tobacco clients. Your stand is absolutely make sense and I guess I shall move on to approach other NGO.

Thanks and best regards,

kok keong

On Fri, Jun 8, 2012 at 11:57 PM, James Middleton <dynamco@netvigator.com> wrote:

Dear Mr Kok,

I take note from your email below that you  state “We do not have any tobacco client at the moment.”

I am also aware that there is no such thing as a free lunch and advertising companies bearing alms need serious arms length trepidation as to the reasoning behind such offers.

Advertising companies work for clients. They do not do things ‘for free’.  In case you did not know TBWA group has major  Big Tobacco clients and Big Pharma Glaxo Smith Kline.

Without delving too deeply into the background of your group clients the following suffices:

http://www.smokefree.hk/UserFiles/resources/about_us/books/seeing_bneath_d_surface_en.pdf

Ah yes, YSP

TBWA Client Philip Morris and JTI

http://www.adforum.com/creative-work/ad/player/32856

Title “Text”
Agency TBWA\LONDON
City London
Campaign MTV Youth Smoking Prevention Campaign – Philip Morris JT International
Advertiser Philip Morris International & JT International
Brand Youth Smoking Prevention
Business Sector Anti-Drug/Alcohol/Tobacco Message
Language English
Type Television
Length 30 seconds

http://www.moreaboutadvertising.com/2012/02/tbwa-london-to-take-lead-role-on-100m-global-aquafresh-account/

“TBWA already works for GSK on anti-smoking products”

http://www.coloribus.com/adsarchive/tv-commercials/nicorette-anti-smoking-gum-detectives-14288055/

TBWA – Nicorette

http://www.campaignlive.co.uk/news/29622/

TBWA loses British heart client due to clash with tobacco

By MICHELE MARTIN, Campaign, Friday, 29 May 1998 12:00AM  The British Heart Foundation account clashes dramatically with GGT’s Marlboro/Philip Morris tobacco business, which is worth around pounds 4 million to the agency in the UK. The British Heart Foundation spent pounds 1.5 million last year.

http://intermarkets-advertising.com/2011/05/rothmans-international-selects-intermarkets-retains-publi-graphics-for-pr/

Rothmans International selects Intermarkets, retains Publi-Graphics for PR

Posted on May 5, 2011 by Susan Baker

Following a review, Rothmans of Pall Mall (International) Limited confirmed that part of its regional account will move to Intermarkets, the associate company of Rothmans’ UK agency TBWA. However, the tobacco giant will also maintain close links with Publi-Graphics with whom they have worked for 20 years.
Publi-Graphics retain the sizeable sponsorship and public relations account for the Middle East division of Rothmans. The development of public relations has been of key importance since their entry into Formula One motor racing with the Rothmans Williams Renault team.
“We are very pleased that Rothmans have endorsed the success of our public relations operation for them and look forward to continuing this successful partnership,” said Samir Khammar, Regional Director of Publi-Graphics.”
He added, “As long-time colleagues and friends, we wish both Rothmans and Intermarkets well in their new association.”
Chris Tomkinson, Managing Director of Rothmans of Pall Mall International, Middle East Division said, “We look forward to Publi-Graphics continuing their valuable contribution in the sponsorship, public relations and associated areas – particularly in relation to the Rothmans Williams Renault Formula One Team which plays an extremely significant role in our business, both globally and in the markets of the Middle East.”
Originally published in ArabAd, 1995

http://www.accessmylibrary.com/article-1G1-10817841/philip-morris-and-tbwa.html

Philip Morris and TBWA fired up to beat ban. (TBWA/Holmes Knight Ritchie)Campaign

| January 25, 1991 | COPYRIGHT 2003 Haymarket Business Publications Ltd. (Hide copyright information)Copyright

Philip Morris is appointing TBWA Holmes Knight Ritchie to oversee a massive project to sidestep the impending ban on tobacco advertising.

To prepare itself for the expected loss of traditional media resulting from EC legislation, the tobacco giant is planning to assign a sizeable budget to explore new areas of advertising, perhaps as much as 15 million pounds.

TBWA Holmes Knight Ritchie creative director Murray Partridge will not reveal the specific techniques or ideas the agency …

From: Kok Keong Chow [mailto:kokkeong.chow@tbwa.com]

Sent: 08 June, 2012 22:45

To: James Middleton

Cc: Christian Masset; Edwin Town; Dr Judith Mackay; raymond_ho@dh.gov.hk; Vienna LAI; siangriffiths@cuhk.edu.hk; Chan Sophia

Subject: Re: Anti-Smoking Video

Dear James,

May I know how the status of the anti-smoking video is?

Thanks,

kok keong

From: Kok Keong Chow [mailto:kokkeong.chow@tbwa.com]

Sent: 06 June, 2012 20:02

To: dynamco@netvigator.com

Subject: Anti-Smoking Video

Dear James,

My name is Chow Kok Keong, Creative Director at TBWA Kuala Lumpur. My friend Yue-Li Gan in Hong Kong got me your contact. Please allow me to explain a little bit of the campaign’s objective, as well as my company profile.

TBWA Kuala Lumpur is an international advertising agency, our HQ is located in New York. Our website is www.tbwa.com.my

Our major clients include Standard Chartered Bank, Energizer, Haagen Dasz, Digi Tele communication, F&N, Havaianas and etc. We do not have any tobacco client at the moment.

THE AD MESSAGE:

Second hand smoke kills. (This direction works well with the “Smoke-free Hong Kong” mission)

THE AD:

we came out the anti-smoking ad for 2 reasons: Good cause and creative award submission.

We will shoot the ad and submit it to regional and international creative award shows, e.g. Spikes, Asia Pacific AdFest, The One Show, Cannes, D&AD and a few more. If we are picking up some awards from those competition, our agency’s creative profile will be raised. And we will publish the case so Clear The Air will get free media exposure too. It is a win-win situation after all. It is that simple :)

THE COST:

Having said that, we will bear the cost of the entire production include film production, post production, talent fees etc etc. The film director will be shooting the film in Shanghai this month. Hence we need a client confirmation before doing post production. It is absolutely free and zero cost to Clear The Air.

THE USAGE:

We will use this video on YouTube. You are allowed to use the video for your future campaign in any form, such as road show, website, Facebook etc etc. All these will not cost you a single cent.

Please let me know if you need further information, looking forward to hear from you soon.

Thanks and best regards,

Kok Keong Chow

Creative Director

TBWA\Malaysia

15th Floor, Block B, HP Towers,

12 Jalan Gelenggang,

Bukit Damansara,

50490 Kuala Lumpur,

Malaysia.

t +60-3-20808200 \ f +60-3-20924130 \ d +60-3-20808256

tbwa.com.my

Kok Keong Chow

Creative Director

TBWA\Malaysia

15th Floor, Block B, HP Towers,

12 Jalan Gelenggang,

Bukit Damansara,

50490 Kuala Lumpur,

Malaysia.

t +60-3-20808200 \ f +60-3-20924130 \ d +60-3-20808256

tbwa.com.my

—–Original Message—–

From: Yue-Li [mailto:meyueli@gmail.com]

Sent: 05 June, 2012 10:53

To: tobacco@cleartheair.org.hk

Subject: Advertising Initiative Proposal

Dear Sir/ Madam,

My name is Yue-Li Gan, and i am emailing you on behalf of TBWA Malaysia, an advertising agency affiliated with the local Advertising Accreditation.

The reason for this email is that I would like to enquire for permission to work with your NGO to create a series of television commercials that speak the anti-smoking message.

This is completely free of charge, and Clear The Air will not have to pay a single cent. There is no catch, no fine line — TBWA Malaysia only requires your permission to speak on behalf of Clear the Air.

If you are interested, we would of course be more than happy to share the idea, story board and structure of the commercial.

Looking forward to your reply.

Sincerely,

Miss Yue-Li Gan

—

Kok Keong Chow

Creative Director

TBWA\Malaysia

15th Floor, Block B, HP Towers,

12 Jalan Gelenggang,

Bukit Damansara,

50490 Kuala Lumpur,

Malaysia.

t +60-3-20808200 \ f +60-3-20924130 \ d +60-3-20808256

tbwa.com.my

Hopes of Leung tobacco war grow

Jun 8th, 2012
by Editor.
No comments yet

HK Standard

The combination of “people’s chief executive” Leung Chun-ying and his possible “wingman” in the health department is raising hopes the government will take the next big step towards a smoke-free city.

Mary Ann Benitez

Friday, June 08, 2012

The combination of “people’s chief executive” Leung Chun-ying and his possible “wingman” in the health department is raising hopes the government will take the next big step towards a smoke-free city.

That move is to ban “mini-billboard advertising” by imposing plain cigarette packaging.

A former Hospital Authority director of public affairs and human resources, who went into private practice, Ko Wing-man, is tipped to become the secretary for food and health in the new Cabinet.

Ko temporarily stepped in for authority chief executive William Ho Shiu-wei when Ho contracted SARS nine years ago.

With Leung expected to announce his team soon, Ko is tipped to succeed York Chow Yat-ngok.

Ko, who describes himself on Twitter as “This is Wing Man. I’m your friend,” earlier told The Standard he favors tobacco control initiatives, without going into details.

“As a doctor and as chairman of the Hong Kong Cancer Society, I would support any initiative to help eliminate tobacco.”

World Lung Foundation senior adviser Judith Mackay said she is “fairly optimistic” about plain packaging being adopted in Hong Kong. “A lot will depend on CY Leung,” she said. “And, to my knowledge, he does not have tobacco connections.”

Tobacco companies have warned they will file lawsuits if Hong Kong goes for plain packaging. A spokeswoman for the Coalition on Tobacco Affairs said there has been no case study in the world to show plain packaging will curb smoking.

Australia is set to be the first nation to enforce plain packaging on December 1.

Hong Kong-based Philip Morris Asia has filed a lawsuit against Canberra, claiming plain packaging legislation deprives it of investment under the Hong Kong/Australia Bilateral Investment Treaty Agreement.

The construction and labelling of Australian cigarettes

Jun 8th, 2012
by Editor.
No comments yet

Download (PDF, 3.52MB)

Facts get smoked on cigarette tax initiative

Jun 7th, 2012
by Editor.
No comments yet

Thursday, June 7, 2012

Shame on the tobacco industry. Its outrageously deceptive, nearly US$50 million campaign appears to have worked. Prop. 29, which would have raised cigarette taxes by $1 a pack to fund cancer research and antismoking efforts, was teetering on the brink of defeat Wednesday. If the result holds, the industry can go back to its business of hooking people on a product that causes cancer and myriad other health problems.

Big Tobacco mastered the art of deception in confusing and misleading voters. Its claim that none of the Prop. 29 revenue would go to “cancer treatment” was a classic half-truth – the money would go to research. Its warning that there was no guarantee that the money would be spent in California was flat-out disingenuous – the intent language and the composition of the panel that would distribute the funds virtually assured otherwise. Its shills rolled out the tired old warning that the higher cigarette tax – still modest by national standards – would lead to rampant bootlegging.

All Californians, smokers and nonsmokers alike, pay the price of smoking’s health consequences – in both their private insurance premiums and the tax dollars they contribute to public medical coverage. Make no mistake: All of us are subsidizing the true cost of smoking. Big Tobacco would have it no other way.

http://sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2012/06/07/EDER1OTR7D.DTL

This article appeared on page A – 19 of the San Francisco Chronicle

© 2012 Hearst Communications Inc. | Privacy Policy | Feedback | RSS Feeds | FAQ | Site Index | Contact

Daily Dish!

Cannabis more dangerous than tobacco, says report

Jun 7th, 2012
by Editor.
No comments yet

Description: Photo / AP

http://www.nzherald.co.nz/news/print.cfm?objectid=10811302

Photo / AP

Cannabis smoking poses a 20-times greater risk of lung cancer per cigarette than tobacco smoking yet most users of the drug are unaware of its dangers, a report says.

The UK’s most popular illicit recreational drug is used by more than a third of people under 24, but 88 per cent believe it is less dangerous than tobacco. One in three said it did not harm health, despite research linking it to respiratory, circulatory and psychiatric problems.

The British Lung Foundation, which commissioned the survey, said the findings were “alarming”.

“New research continues to reveal the multiple health consequences of smoking cannabis, [yet] there is still a dangerous lack of public awareness of quite how harmful this drug can be,” said Dame Helena Shovelton, BLF chief executive.

“Young people in particular are smoking cannabis unaware that each cannabis cigarette they smoke increases their chances of developing lung cancer by as much as an entire packet of 20 tobacco cigarettes.”

She called for a public health campaign to “dispel the myth that smoking cannabis is somehow a safe pastime”.

The reason cannabis is more dangerous than tobacco, per cigarette, is thought to be related to the way it is smoked. Cannabis smokers inhale more deeply and hold it longer than tobacco smokers.

The average puff on a cannabis joint is two-thirds larger and is held four times longer than the average puff of a tobacco cigarette. As a result, the cannabis smoker inhales four times as much tar and five times as much carbon monoxide.

Cannabis smoking has been linked with a wide range of respiratory problems, while the concentration of tetrahydrocannabinol(THC) – the drug’s psychoactive ingredient – has doubled since the 1990s, according to analysis of samples from police seizures.

Unlike tobacco, cannabis does not contain nicotine and so is not addictive.

However, the generation that grew up in the 1960s was the first to use cannabis on a large scale and is too young to have been followed into old age, so the long-term effects of the drug are still not known.

– Independent

By Jeremy Laurence

Copyright ©2012, APN Holdings NZ Limited

Cancer hospital chairwoman’s link to tobacco

Jun 7th, 2012
by Editor.
No comments yet

http://www.theaustralian.com.au/national-affairs/state-politics/cancer-hospital-chairwomans-link-to-tobacco/story-e6frgczx-1226386768416

THE chairwoman of one of the nation’s leading cancer hospitals has defended her legal work for tobacco giant Philip Morris, arguing she no longer accepts business from the company and is a committed non-smoker.

Wendy Harris SC was appointed Peter MacCallum Cancer Centre chairwoman last year by the Baillieu government, making her the effective custodian of Victoria’s major cancer treatment operator.

But it has emerged that Ms Harris helped launch her career as a lawyer by working as a solicitor for Philip Morris while on the staff of law firm Arthur Robinson & Hedderwicks. Labor said Ms Harris should never have been made chairwoman of the Peter MacCallum board.

“While Ms Harris is probably qualified for the position, we have concerns about her appointment given her background,” said opposition health spokesman Gavin Jennings.

Now a prominent barrister, Ms Harris disclosed in her Bar profile she had worked on tobacco regulation and media and constitutional law from 1993-97.

Documents seen by The Australian show Ms Harris was a solicitor on her then law firm’s litigation team and a contact point in 1996 for Philip Morris, which manufactures and sells cigarettes around the world.

Ms Harris said past employment did not disqualify her from working for a cause she was deeply committed to.

“You will have observed that it is many years since I was an employee solicitor at Arthur Robinson & Hedderwicks, where I was engaged — among many other matters, and with many other clients — in work for Philip Morris,” she told The Australian.

“The work I was engaged in at that time — now more than 15 years ago — was principally advertising regulation. I had no involvement in product liability work for Philip Morris.”

Peter MacCallum chief executive Craig Bennett said Ms Harris had been appointed a year ago. “Ms Harris has been a strong advocate for Peter Mac, offering informed advice and working with the utmost integrity and commitment to promote good governance,” he said.

Upcoming Archives of Internal Medicine study and commentary

Jun 7th, 2012
by Editor.
No comments yet

Download PDF : 06-11 IMD smoking mortality older people

Philip Morris sues Norway over tobacco display ban

Jun 5th, 2012
by Editor.
No comments yet

http://www.google.com/hostednews/afp/article/ALeqM5h4xZS4Ivfd59UHSz4oLfmoItAxoQ?docId=CNG.c696b6b901a1a83f3cc55da5f6ed67e9.301

This shows the effectiveness of POS display bans – the tobacco company is screaming

OSLO — Global tobacco giant Philip Morris began a suit Monday against Norway, claiming that the Scandinavian country’s ban on the display of cigarettes in stores violates European competition rules.

“The reason that we filed (the suit) is that if you can’t show your products in stores, which is the case in Norway now, clearly it becomes pretty difficult to compete in the market … with what in the end is a legal product,” company spokeswoman Anne Edwards told AFP.

The case opened in the Oslo district court Monday and was set to last through June 13.

Following in the footsteps of several other countries such as Ireland and Iceland, Norway in 2010 banned the display of cigarettes in stores in an attempt to cut impulse buys of tobacco products.

Cigarettes were banished to closed cases and cigarette dispensers do not show brand labels.

Philip Morris filed its lawsuit in March 2010 claiming the display ban was a violation of European Economic Area (EEA) rules and the Oslo district court requested an advisory opinion from the European Free Trade Association (EFTA) court before hearing the case.

That court said last September that the display ban could to a certain extent be seen as blocking the free movement of goods, thus violating EEA rules.

It also pointed out that Norway’s aim to reduce tobacco consumption was in line with EEA regulations, thus leaving the final conclusion up to the Oslo court.

“The prevention of smoking is clearly the most important single initiative when it comes to preventing cancer and a number of other illnesses,” said Anne Lise Ryel, who heads the Norwegian Cancer Society, which is representing Norwegian authorities in the case.

“The ban on displaying tobacco in stores is an effective initiative to reduce tobacco use because it blocks anormalisation of tobacco products, protects children and young people from marketing of tobacco products, reduces the risk of relapses for former smokers and avoids impulse buys,” she told public broadcaster NRK.

Philip Morris meanwhile disputes the fact that the display ban has had an impact on tobacco consumption.

“What you have is a ban that is very restrictive on competition and at the same time there’s been no impact on consumption,” insisted Edwards, maintaining that Norway instead had seen a hike in “illegal and non-duty paid cigarettes.

“We think we have a good case, otherwise we would not have filed it,” Edwards added.

Copyright © 2012 AFP. All rights reserved

← Earlier Posts Newer Posts →