Philip Morris' litigation prevention program in Asia
More details
Hide details
1
Korean Association on Smoking or Health, Korea, Republic of
2
Seoul National University, Korea, Republic of
Publication date: 2018-03-01
Tob. Induc. Dis. 2018;16(Suppl 1):A99
Download abstract book (PDF)
KEYWORDS
TOPICS
ABSTRACT
Background:
Since the Master Settlement Agreement (MSA) in 1998, Philip Morris (PM)
as a transnational tobacco company (TTC) has concerned about the tobacco
litigation filed outside of the US and subsequent litigation expenses. We
identified the strategies of PM and its affiliates in the intervention and
prevention of litigation outside the US, especially in South Korea and other
Asian countries.
Methods:
Analysis of 193 documents obtained from the Truth Tobacco Industry
Documents, and data from governments/international organisation reports, media,
and scholar articles.
Results:
PM organised and operated the Litigation Prevention Program (LPP) to
create legal environments making tobacco litigation difficult to begin, and
resources such as networks with local lawyers, officials, media, and even
competitors to effectively response to such litigation. PM developed the LPP
based on its legal strategies in the US against tobacco litigation, and
disseminated them all around the world including South Korea. In 1999, the
first joint action against Korea Tobacco and Ginseng Cooperate, (KTGC) a state-owned tobacco company in Korea, and
Korean government was begun. KTGC asked PM to support this tobacco litigation,
and PM provided KTGC with its legal strategies through the LPP. In front of
legal threats, tobacco companies, competitors in markets, jointly fought back
the litigation in Korea.
Conclusions:
Any litigation against a single local tobacco company may confront legal
networks of transnational tobacco companies. Development of guidelines of Article 19 of the Framework
Convention on Tobacco Control is needed to support tobacco litigation around
the world. Without the legal support from international
anti-tobacco community, it would be hard for local tobacco litigation to
win.