Lawyers arguing on behalf of British American Tobacco (BATSA) have drawn first blood on Wednesday, as their eagerly anticipated challenge against the cigarette ban is heard in court for the first time. Advocate Alfred Cockrell has argued against the controversial restrictions, with Nkosazana Dlamini-Zuma as his top target.
The COGTA Minister, very much seen as the brains behind the ruling, has staunchly defended the cigarette ban since its inception. She’s the first respondent in this case and has previously defended her position against FITA in the North Gauteng High Court. However, Cockrell was able to raise some serious questions.
Dlamini-Zuma branded ‘perverse’ for cigarette ban policies
The advocate has noted that smoking itself is not banned, but the purchase of cigarettes is. This means that the rights of business owners and vendors are impaired, rather than those who are meant to be the subject of the tobacco ban. He’s also accused the government of ‘misrepresenting’ their own arguments.
“Dlamini-Zuma’s argument is extraordinary. People were meant to stop smoking due to the cigarette ban. If you took the minister’s affidavit, opened it on any page and put your finger on it, the chances are you’ll reach a paragraph that claims prohibition limits how many people get sick, and how many ICU beds are occupied…”
“Given that the whole purpose is to stop smoking, we do not understand why it’s ancillary if smokers actually give up. The government has backtracked, and with respect, they have misconstrued their own policies. Cabinet is now ignoring complaints from sellers or who have had their freedom of trade rights harmed.”
“The minister’s assertion that 10-15% of smokers will now quit is simply perverse.”
Alfred Cockrell, arguing on behalf of BATSA
What BATSA and their lawyers have argued on Wednesday:
In the first session on Wednesday, Cockrell went on to poke more holes in Dlamini-Zuma’s decisions:
- It was stated that, even if smoking is harmful, adults have the right to make the decision to smoke or not.
- Dlamini-Zuma’s logic for instituting the ban has been labeled as ‘wafer-thin’, and her justifications ‘marginal’.
- Cockrell asserts that people rely on cigarettes to keep them off hard drugs. That safety net has been removed.
- Companies cannot sustain those lower down the chain, such as retailers and farmers, when they cannot order tobacco.
- It was also presented that the restrictions are meant to protect the seller over the consumer, but such a ban only forces the retailer out of business. Meanwhile, smokers will simply get their goods via illicit means.
- Essentially, it’s argued that Dlamini-Zuma is not prohibiting consumption, but only the purchase of cigarettes.
Cockrell challenges the minister's assertion from a non-medical doctor, that not smoking will "give your lungs a fighting chance" against #COVID19, saying no data or evidence is produced to prove this, and the argument is "unscientific". #tobaccoban
— Lindsay Dentlinger (@metrobabe) August 5, 2020
