PRESS BRIEFING ON INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON ILLICIT TOBACCO TRADE

The Executive Director of the World Health Organization's Cluster on Non-Communicable Diseases and Mental Health, Derek Yach, briefed correspondents upon the conclusion today of the International Conference on Illicit Tobacco Trade.

Dr. Yach reminded correspondents that the Conference, which began on

30 July, had been hosted by the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms.  It    was an intersessional meeting for developing a framework convention on tobacco control.  Its main importance was the fact that it happened; one should not underestimate the importance of law enforcement officers and public health officials coming together. 

The meeting, which brought together two groups with different agendas, was very open and businesslike, he said.  There was a common sense of purpose now with tackling tobacco control in a way that would help everyone.  As a public health person, he had seen in the eyes of the law enforcement officers a greater sense of purpose about their work; they were not just after criminals, but were contributing to public health.  That extra meaning would likely strengthen their work.

Smuggling was an important problem for both groups, he said.  Smuggled cigarettes were cheap cigarettes, and cheap cigarettes meant greater consumption among the young and the poor, which increased consumption markedly.  Also, smuggled cigarettes evaded health warnings and labelling and, very importantly, resulted in massive revenue losses to governments.  That also contributed to money floating around a system, which could then be used for criminal and terrorist activity.  Participants from 145 member States had included the largest exporters and consumers, as well as smaller countries and small island States. 

He said there were also several international agencies, among them, the World Health Organization (WHO), the World Customs Organization, Interpol and the European Union Anti-Fraud Unit, which recognized their own roles and responsibilities.  The European Union Anti-Fraud Unit recently filed an appeal case in the United States courts, which was an indication of its concern about the complicity of tobacco companies in smuggling. 

From the perspective of the WHO, a key point had been that international action started with strong domestic action on smuggling, he said.  The capacity of many countries to enforce laws and strengthen border controls was extremely weak. The meeting provided a sense of global solidarity, of the need to join forces and strengthen border controls, which would have a benefit beyond tobacco.

As a public health agency, the WHO expected a number of suggestions for immediate use by countries, he went on.  The longer-term impact would be to develop stronger texts for the framework convention and possibly a protocol on smuggling.  On licensing sellers of tobacco products, strong support had emerged for the notion that strict licensing and record-keeping would reduce smuggling in a country.  The second set of issues had concerned labelling, for which a range of suggestions had been made, including labelling the intended destination of

cigarettes, whether they could be exported, and making very clear the tax on the cigarettes and the warnings prevailing in individual countries.

He said that the question of tracking and tracing was also discussed, particularly the movement from production to individual use.  Throughout those discussions, it had become clear that many international agencies were "sitting" on data that was inadequately shared, both among international and national agencies.  One agreed point had been the need to establish a mechanism for better cooperation.  Hampering much of that work was insufficient capacity.  Stronger enforcement systems were needed, as well as better computerization, in order to access data in real time.

Some countries had felt that a percentage of tobacco tax should be used to strengthen domestic law enforcement, he continued.  That formula was in use by the United Kingdom, where an investment of $300 million was expected to yield increased revenues of $3 billion. The question of the role of the tobacco companies had come up throughout the meeting.  The delegations of Ireland and others had pointed to tobacco company complicity in smuggling and the hampering of investigations. 

He said the WHO was not surprised at the lack of support of tobacco companies for any aspect of tobacco control, given its own experience of having conducted an inquiry into the way in which they had subverted all of WHO's policies, from its tax policy to advertising, to denying evidence on environmental tobacco smoke.

Asked what the final report would say about the collusion of the cigarette companies and smuggling, he said he anticipated that it would identify two issues of concern:  how tobacco companies had hampered the enforcement activities of law enforcement agencies worldwide; and the belief shared by many countries about direct company complicity in smuggling. 

He recalled that, more than two years ago, the International Consortium of Investigative Journalists had detailed the problem based upon 11,000 pages of tobacco industry documents showing how companies, such as British American Tobacco and Philip Morris, had sought to control and exploit smuggling as a means of gaining market access, including in places where they were not licensed to sell.  The activities of the European Union Anti-Fraud Unit were an indication of how seriously countries viewed that problem. 

He added to a follow-up question that the tobacco industry representatives had not provided any defence at the meeting just ended.  Regarding whether any sympathy had been expressed for them, he said there was a strong view that tackling the smuggling problem would require working with tobacco companies.  But, in doing so, eyes should be wide open to the possibility that they would continue to find ways to thwart effective tobacco control.  In the end, it was their product that had to be labelled and, in the end, everyone had to understand what was technically possible in terms of labelling, tracking and distributing.  Some tobacco companies had actually started looking at advanced tracking systems, he said.

Replying to a question about whether any countries, in addition to the United Kingdom, had expressed support for directing a portion of cigarette taxes to enforcement, he reaffirmed that the practice was in place in the United Kingdom, whose Treasury had invested $310 million in better border controls with an expected yield of extra revenues in the amount of $3.6 billion.  That would ensure continued tobacco control.  Many countries had felt that was a very sensible way to go, which would be reflected in the final text of the meeting.  The United Kingdom was a great success story in reducing both smuggling and cigarette consumption.  It was also experiencing a steady decline in lung cancer deaths, which had not been seen in many countries.

* *** *