Smoking out the lies: documents research on tobacco tax policy in Kenya
More details
Hide details
1
International Institute for Legislative Affairs, Research and Development, Kenya
2
Centre for Tobacco Control in Africa, Centre Manager, Uganda
3
University of Colorado, United States of America
4
Centre for Tobacco Control in Africa, Monitoring and Evaluation, Uganda
5
International Institute for Legislative Affairs, Kenya
6
Ministry of Health, Kenya, Tobacco Control Unit, Kenya
7
The Star Newspaper, Kenya
8
Ministry of Health, Kenya, Kenya
Publication date: 2018-03-01
Tob. Induc. Dis. 2018;16(Suppl 1):A89
Download abstract book (PDF)
KEYWORDS
TOPICS
ABSTRACT
Background:
Tobacco Industry (TI) interference in policy
development and implementation in Kenya has been widely reported in both local
and international media outlets. A local newspaper, Daily
Nation, dated 22nd November, 2004, reported that when the current
tobacco control law was tabled in parliament, British American Tobacco Kenya
(BATK) and Mastermind Tobacco Kenya (MTK) organized a weekend-long retreat in
Chale Island, for 40 Members of Parliament (MPs) to lobby against the Bill. Despite
the passage of the tobacco control law in 2007, the TI still had its way in
influencing tobacco tax and price measures using different tactics. We carried
out this project therefore, to expose and document these tactics employed by
the TI in Kenya.
Methods:
The Truth Tobacco Industry Documents Archive
(http://legacy.library.ucsf.edu), a database compiled by the University of
California in San Francisco in 2002, served as the primary source of
information for the study. Key
Informant Interviews were purposively sampled from relevant government
ministries and agencies, civil society and other actors. The findings from the library and the KII, were
then triangulated with statements from industry and government officials and
other related articles in newspaper stories and publications.
Results:
We
established that the tobacco industry in Kenya has repeatedly used 6 main
tactics to influence tobacco tax and
price policies, they include: use of front groups, use of tobacco
advertisements, promotion and sponsorship, influencing policy development and
legislative processes, Illicit and Deceptive Trade Practices, Intimidation and
Litigation, Phony statistics and researches.
Conclusions:
The
TI armed with their financial muscle and high-powered political connections,
will go any distance to achieve their goal for profit. However, their tactics
and strategies in interference has been similar over the years. This implies
then, that awareness of these tactics by policymakers will go a long way in
preventing future TI interference.