Tobacco industry interference with the 2017 Thai Tobacco Product Control Act
More details
Hide details
1
Mahidol University, Faculty of Public Health, Thailand
2
Law Health and Ethics Center, Faculty of Law, Thammasat University, Thailand
3
The Thailand Health Promotion Institute (THPI), Thailand
4
Tobacco Control Research and Knowledge Management Center, Mahidol University, Thailand
Publication date: 2018-03-01
Tob. Induc. Dis. 2018;16(Suppl 1):A663
Download abstract book (PDF)
KEYWORDS
TOPICS
ABSTRACT
Background:
Thailand is among the
earliest Asian countries to feel the force of the industry's influence because
of trade disputes in the late 1980s.
This provided Thailand important lessons of how to work against industry
interests. These lessons have previously
been researched through qualitative analysis of Thailand's policy and action.
Methods:
Information from
tobacco industry documents and specific policies and strategies used against
the industry are illustrated and are applied to an examination of recent industry
efforts: economic arguments from business interests and front
groups, attempts to discredit established research findings, and using
litigation to delay or block government tobacco control legislation/regulation.
Results:
Counter
actions
were implemented early, developed continually, and shifted from being reactive
to proactive as industry strategies became clear. Essential features of counter
efforts included carefully monitoring tobacco industry activities, informing
stakeholders of industry activities through coordinated communications, and countering
industry proposals, marketing efforts, and public relations activities,
including corporate social responsibility actions.
Examples of interference to delay implementation of the
new 2017 tobacco control law are provided. These include how the industry
established front groups such as the Thai Tobacco Trade Association (TTTA) and
the Thai Tobacco Growers, Curers and Dealers Association (TTA), both
exaggerating economic consequences from the new law. Interference was seen through
trade organizations, media, and attempts to meet high ranking authorities prior
to the passage of the new law in March 2017. Interestingly, similar tactics had
been used by the tobacco industry to interfere with the adoption of the
previous Thai tobacco control law in 1992.
Conclusions:
Exposing how the industry seeks to undermine the very
authority of state policy provides lessons about the exploitive and
irresponsible nature of the industry that can serve to warn and empower
politicians and all policymakers to reject CSR and other fraudulent actions of
the industry.