Fight for 85% pictorial health warnings on tobacco product packages - a success story from India
More details
Hide details
1
Government of India, Ministry of Health and Family Welfare, India
2
International Union Against Tuberculosis and Lung Disease, Tobacco Control, India
Publication date: 2018-03-01
Tob. Induc. Dis. 2018;16(Suppl 1):A747
Download abstract book (PDF)
KEYWORDS
TOPICS
ABSTRACT
Background and challenges to implementation:
The pictorial health warning (PW) is
the most cost effective measure to create awareness about adverse health consequences of tobacco
usage. Section 5 of Indian Tobacco Control Act (COTPA-2003) requires printing
of specified pictorial health warning on all tobacco product packages.
Though PW were first notified
in 2006, its implementation was deferred time and again due to the challenge posed by
Tobacco Industry (TI). First ever PW (40% on one side of pack only) was printed
from May 2009 on direction of the Supreme Court. But its insufficient size and placement
it had failed to have the deterrent effect on tobacco users. Thereafter, on
recommendation of the Expert Committee, the Government revised PWs and notified
the new set of field tested PWs covering
85% display area on October 2014.
But as expected, its implementation was delayed by multiple
court cases by TI and representations and appeals from their front groups. An Indian
parliamentary committee and a High Court also issued adverse orders.
Intervention or response:
Indian Government took firm stand against these
challenges and defended the new PWs before Supreme Courts as well as several High
Courts. It was also unflinchingly responded to the committees' queries in
support of the PWs with scientific evidences and legal provisions. Indian civil
societies coordinated efforts and intense media advocacy provided further
strength to the Governments' stand.
Results and lessons learnt:
The interventions and
response from the Government and Civil Society resulted in the High Courts and
the Supreme Court of India passing orders supporting the enforcement of the new
warnings from 1st April 2016.
Conclusions and key recommendations:
The case discussed
confirms that with strategically planned approach, robust scientific evidence, legal
provisions, judicial precedents, will collaborated efforts of all tobacco
control stakeholders, it is possible to counter any TI interference to deflect
the Government's initiatives.