Australia wins landmark WTO ruling on plain tobacco packaging

[webfact]

Australia wins landmark WTO ruling on plain tobacco packaging

By Tom Miles

 

FILE PHOTO: A packet of Marlboro cigarettes made by Philip Morris are pictured in this photo illustration July 3, 2017. REUTERS/Jason Reed/File Photo

 

GENEVA (Reuters) - Australia triumphed on Thursday in a major trade dispute over its pioneering "plain" tobacco packaging law, with World Trade Organization judges rejecting a complaint brought by Cuba, Indonesia, Honduras and Dominican Republic.

 

The WTO panel said Australia's law improved public health by reducing the use of tobacco products, rebuffing claims that alternative measures would be equally effective. It also rejected the argument that Australia had unjustifiably infringed tobacco trademarks and violated intellectual property rights.

 

Australia's law, introduced in 2010, bans logos and distinctively-coloured cigarette packaging in favour of drab olive packets that look more like military or prison issue, with brand names printed in small standardised fonts.

 

The challenge to it was seen as a test case for public health legislation globally, and could lead to tighter marketing rules for unhealthy foods and alcohol as well as tobacco.

 

Honduras indicated that it was likely to appeal, saying in a statement that the ruling contained legal and factual errors and appeared not to be even-handed, objective or respectful of the complainants' rights.

 

"It appears that this dispute will require the review of the Panel’s findings by the WTO Appellate Body before any final conclusions can be drawn," it said.

 

An Indonesian trade official said Indonesia would examine its options. Cuban and Dominican trade officials were not immediately available for comment.

 

Australia said it was ready to defend against an appeal.

 

"DANGEROUS PRECEDENT"

"We will not shy away from fighting for the right to protect the health of Australians," Trade Minister Steven Ciobo and Rural Health Minister Bridget McKenzie said in a statement. "Australia has achieved a resounding victory."

 

The World Health Organization welcomed the WTO ruling, saying it cleared "another legal hurdle thrown up in the tobacco industry’s efforts to block tobacco control and is likely to accelerate implementation of plain packaging around the globe."

 

It said six other countries had brought in plain packaging laws - Hungary, Ireland, France, New Zealand, Norway and Britain - while another six had passed laws yet to be implemented -Burkina Faso, Canada, Georgia, Romania, Slovenia and Thailand.

"A number of other countries are examining the policy," the WHO added.

 

Vera Luiza da Costa e Silva, head of the secretariat of the WHO's Framework Convention on Tobacco Control, said there was already a "domino effect", with countries moving towards Australian-style rules and seeing them as a way towards the "endgame" with less than 5 percent of the population smoking.

 

Geir Ulle, International Trade Director at Japan Tobacco International, said the decision was a major step backwards for the protection of intellectual property rights internationally.

 

"It sets a dangerous precedent that could encourage governments to ban branding on other products without providing any reliable evidence of benefits to public health," Ulle said, adding that recent data showed plain packaging was not working.

"This ruling doesn’t make the policy right or effective, nor does it make it worth copying."

 

(Reporting by Tom Miles; Additional reporting by Martinne Geller; Editing by Catherine Evans and Andrew Heavens)

 

-- © Copyright Reuters 2018-06-29

[Cats4ever]

I am a smoker and don't see a problem with packaging if it discourages youngsters from taking it up. Those who get in my face about smoking, don't help their cause.

[Peterw42]

I think this plain packaging has actually had the opposite effect amongst kids, it makes it more mysterious and inaccessible, just the things that make teenagers want something. 

[stevenl]

Why are Cuba, Honduras, Indonesia and DR objecting?

[rosst]

I am proud that our country is not and will not bow to some Kangaroo court owned by big business. 

The sabre rattling of the tobacco industry have not intimidated our Government and I fully support the policy of plain packaging. 

[Peterw42]

8 minutes ago, stevenl said:

Why are Cuba, Honduras, Indonesia and DR objecting?

I think the tobacco industries of those countries, not the governments.

[stevenl]

9 minutes ago, Peterw42 said:

I think the tobacco industries of those countries, not the governments.

That would make sense.

[stevenl]

17 minutes ago, rosst said:

I am proud that our country is not and will not bow to some Kangaroo court owned by big business. 

The sabre rattling of the tobacco industry have not intimidated our Government and I fully support the policy of plain packaging. 

What kangaroo court are you talking about?

[ThaiFelix]

Its a load of bulls##t.  If the country cared so much it would ban tobacco altogether.  I went back a few years ago, after quite some years, and realised on the plane, when filling the customs form, that I was well over the limit.  I declared them and when checked at the airport I asked the customs officer if there was a fine.  "No" she says, "we dont care how many you bring in so long as you pay the taxes"!!

[Srikcir]

7 hours ago, webfact said:

while another six had passed laws yet to be implemented -Burkina Faso, Canada, Georgia, Romania, Slovenia and Thailand.

Not sure "yet to be implemented" means for Thailand.

It has been requiring warning graphics on cigarette wrapping for some time. In summer 2014 it increased the graphic size by almost double to cover about 85% of the cover. Before then the cover graphics was limited to 50%.

http://www.tobaccolabels.ca/thailand-pack-warnings-set-to-increase-to-85/

The irony to the State's efforts to discourage smoking because of its harmful effects is that it has a tobacco monopoly in Thailand to produce cigarettes. That may explain why the government has banned e-cigarettes as harmful but not cigarettes.

[car720]

1 hour ago, ThaiFelix said:

Its a load of bulls##t.  If the country cared so much it would ban tobacco altogether.  I went back a few years ago, after quite some years, and realised on the plane, when filling the customs form, that I was well over the limit.  I declared them and when checked at the airport I asked the customs officer if there was a fine.  "No" she says, "we dont care how many you bring in so long as you pay the taxes"!!

I agree.  If I  knew that a cupcake contained cyanide and would kill you and still sold it to you then I would be charged with premeditated murder.  The government says that smoking kills yet still allows the sale of them.  If they know that smoking kills and still sells them then where is the murder charge for them.  It is all about revenue.  They couldn't give a toss about health.

[HooHaa]

3 minutes ago, car720 said:

I agree.  If I  knew that a cupcake contained cyanide and would kill you and still sold it to you then I would be charged with premeditated murder.  The government says that smoking kills yet still allows the sale of them.  If they know that smoking kills and still sells them then where is the murder charge for them.  It is all about revenue.  They couldn't give a toss about health.

your oh so simplistic analogy presupposes i dont already know the cupcake contains cyanide.

if i knew it contained cyanide, if, in fact, it carried a warning informing me of the cyanide how could you be liable?

and of course its about revenue. huge amounts of it. 

if there were no revenue to the government they most certainly would not allow the sale.  

[car720]

2 minutes ago, HooHaa said:

your oh so simplistic analogy presupposes i dont already know the cupcake contains cyanide.

if i knew it contained cyanide, if, in fact, it carried a warning informing me of the cyanide how could you be liable?

and of course its about revenue. huge amounts of it. 

if there were no revenue to the government they most certainly would not allow the sale.  

so my even more simplistic question is that if they know it kills then how can they get away with selling them?  It is the epitome of hypocrisy in my opinion.  And even if I told you the cupcake was full of cyanide and you still decided to eat it then I would still be charged with murder.

[stevenl]

Present day tobacco use has a history, and that can not be erased. Western governments are well on the way to banning it, but this takes a long time.

[FitnessHealthTravel]

4 hours ago, Peterw42 said:

I think this plain packaging has actually had the opposite effect amongst kids, it makes it more mysterious and inaccessible, just the things that make teenagers want something. 

Yeah right, Marketing 101...phew!

[Jonmarleesco]

10 hours ago, Cats4ever said:

I am a smoker and don't see a problem with packaging if it discourages youngsters from taking it up. Those who get in my face about smoking, don't help their cause.

No problem. Just so long as you don't take the liberty of getting in my face with your smoking.