Photo: Melinda Ferguson / Twitter
Photo: Melinda Ferguson / Twitter
The first day of the cigarette ban court appeal, lodged by British American Tobacco (BATSA), has drawn to a conclusion on Wednesday, with another full session scheduled for Thursday. Although the rapid delivery of a verdict on Nkosazana Dlamini-Zuma’s controversial legislation is unlikely, proceedings will conclude come what may tomorrow – as the future of our cigarette ban hangs in the balance.
Arguments against Nkosazana Dlamini-Zuma
Alfred Cockrell went into ‘BAT’ for the tobacco giants. He led a fierce morning session, where the advocate dismissed the Constitutional merits of the restrictions and accused Dlamini-Zuma of being unable to justify her given reasons for pushing ahead with the policy. He also made light work of her ‘supporting research’:
“Based on the Minister’s assumption that one million people may stop smoking during the pandemic, it could free up 500 hospital beds. Even so, not all those beds will be needed at the same time. Furthermore, how can it be reasonable to deprive the fiscus of R38, a day in order to stop 10-15% of people from smoking?”
“Nkosazana Dlamini-Zuma doesn’t have the power to prohibit sales of tobacco products, neither can she do so in contravention of an act of Parliament. Illegal cigarettes contain more harmful substances than do legal ones, and it is perverse that the minister is relying on illicit trade to prove her point.”
Alfred Cockrell
Cigarette ban court case – when will we get a verdict?
Meanwhile, Andrew Breitenbach was deployed by the government to argue their case. He largely stuck to the script, backing claims that Cabinet and Dlamini-Zuma ‘followed the science’ on this issue. But he also conceded that the cigarette ban has not been ‘100% effective’ so far – an admission that will be music to BATSA’s ears…
“There’s a real risk that people who smoke will require medical intervention if there’s a significant peak in COVID-19. Government can’t say the cigarette ban has been 100% effective, but a number of people have stopped smoking. There’s medical evidence to support the government’s approach to scarce medical resources.”
“This is a lives and livelihoods case, and ultimately, prohibition comes at a price. The minister [Dlamini-Zuma] has already taken steps to lift the cigarette ban, by allowing trade higher up in the chain [between producers and manufacturers]. the ban deals with prohibiting sales, so infringements on rights are just incidental.”
Andrew Breitenbach
- Proceedings will resume on Thursday 6 August, but judgement is likely to be reserved until the end of next week.
