We must revisit all the bans existing in our country to curb the menace of cross border smuggling and sale of contraband products.
We find a strange adherence and affection for prohibition of products in our country even though the products are allowed to be manufactured and traded legally. As a consumer we strongly feel bans can be placed on products and product-related services only if there is a risk that they may cause serious injury, illness or death. All the countries around the world are now engaged in harmonising laws and standards to promote Universal Quality and Safety Standards in the interest of public health. It has been well documented that despite bans there are enough evidence that bans have done little to protect the consumer, rather accelerated growth of contraband product. Virtually every banned product has found both its customer and its avenue.
Take the example of the six States, Bihar, Gujarat, Tripura, Lakshadweep, Mizoram and Nagaland, which are declared as the dry states in India, where Alcohol sale and consumption is totally banned. Both anecdotally and through seizures, it is evident that there is no dearth of supply in all the six states of liquor despite over half a century of prohibition in few States. From books to porn, from medicines to apps, India has a long history of resorting to bans as an option to both regulation and governance. Most bans have either a patriotic or moral overlay to them, particularly when they apply to those items that are otherwise allowed by government and popularly embraced around the world. So, while there is no quarrel over bans on, say, unsafe products, drugs, wildlife products or antiquities that compromise on safety, it boggles the imagination why we need to stay wedded to bans as a moral posture in other areas, where the world has moved on based on science and evidence.
It becomes that much more mystifying when it applies to products that are clearly showing a consumer preference. We should focus on informed choice rather than ban. Consumer information is the most important element for consumer protection and policy decisions. Being an informed consumer is advantageous to the economy, market and consumers. An informed consumer is capable of making sensible decisions by gaining an insight about a product prior to its purchase. We should avoid such regulations that curb the freedom based on certain political or unscientific justification.
[box type=”info” align=”” class=”” width=””]In the case of Khesari dal, after fifty five long years, the Indian Council for Medical Research decided to lift a ban on khesari dal, banned in the year 1961 for what scientists and medical experts had then said could cause lathyrism a condition which could lead to paralysis of the lower body and even cause numbness in the limbs and spine.[/box]
We must revisit all the bans existing in our country to curb the menace of cross border smuggling and sale of contraband products. In my view, such an initiative will be in the interest of the citizens and the country
As all of you will recall, a ban on smoking in public places which covers offices, hotels, restaurants, hospitals, college campuses, bars and discos came into force in India on October 2, 2008 in an effort to curb high levels of tobacco addiction. The law also banned direct and indirect advertising of tobacco products and the sale of cigarettes to children. What was the outcome of this? Surrogate advertising in movies flourished and smoking in undesignated places increased without any inhibition or fear. So clearly, the ban did not meet its intended purpose.
Similarly, in 2019, the government banned e-cigarettes/ ENDS, which are sold globally as viable options for consumers as they are less harmful alternatives to conventional tobacco products. Due to the ban in India, Indian consumers are being deprived of the benefits of such products without any credible justification, whereas consumers around the world continue to derive benefits as they are regulated and legally sold with appropriate controls. If regulated appropriately in India, it will provide consumers a better choice and will also help control the sale and use of illegally sourced ENDS/ e-cigarettes, especially by youth and non-smokers.
India has the second-largest tobacco-using population in the world and tobacco causes about eight million avoidable deaths per annum. Globally, it is responsible for over 12% of premature deaths. India is a signatory to the World Health Organization’s Framework Convention on Tobacco Control (WHO FCTC) since 2004 and the preamble to WHO FCTC recognises the need for tobacco harm reduction as an important element in addition to all other tobacco control measures.
In India, the National Health Policy 2017 comprehensively includes the aspect of tobacco control and sets out the target for achieving 30% relative reduction in prevalence of tobacco use by the year 2025 from the levels in 2009-10. India has made great strides in tobacco control over the past 20 years. The Government has promoted nicotine replacement therapies (nicotine chewing gums, patches etc.) to help people quit smoking. Family members, doctors and health authorities alike try every trick in the book – from awareness about the benefits of quitting to persuasion and motivation to threats; however, only a handful succeed in chucking the habit.
Over the years, the debate over tobacco has split into two clear streams: those who believe that the only way forward is to quit tobacco or, to put it simply, quit or die, and the others who believe that quitting tobacco is easier said than done. The latter believe that for consumers who are unable to quit, another way out could be to use products that reduce or eliminate risk altogether. Fortunately, over the last decade or so, thanks to significant advancements made in science and research, there are now a wide range of products available that reduce harm to a large extent. Such thinking has also been endorsed by many governments globally, including those of the UK, Japan, USA and much of Europe.
It is now clear that many governments are recognizing the role that such products play towards reducing harm from tobacco. Incorporation of such harm reduction approach into the National Health Policy here in India will support those consumers for whom quitting is a clear challenge and obstacle. We need a more effective tobacco control direction that relies on well-researched and scientifically backed products that are relatively safer for consumers rather than an outright ban.
Policymakers can initiate multi-stakeholder consultations with consumers, public-health analysts, and researchers to develop a progressive and evolving regulatory framework. There is sufficient data and science available which can be relied upon to evaluate the impact of alternatives in the country and propose a progressive approach to bans.
It is prudent to explore options of safer and less risky alternatives when conventional tobacco products, that are significantly higher in their risk profile, are legally sold in the country. Article 47 of the Constitution of India obliges the State to regard the improvement of public health as among its primary duties, and not giving the consumer the right to an informed choice is not only against public policy but also undermines the Constitution and the freedom of a consumer to choose for himself.
[author title=”Prof Bejon Kumar Misra, International Consumer Policy Expert” image=”http://”][/author]
