How Switzerland is undermining the global fight against smoking and the preservation of human rights

The report examines public health policies and progress in tobacco control in Switzerland, taking into account the country's obligations with regard to its human rights commitments. The report concludes that tobacco companies in Switzerland cause harm and commit human rights violations, both in Switzerland and abroad. The climate favourable to tobacco companies in Switzerland thus weakens the fight against tobacco in the country and globally.

Summary

• Smoking, an industrial epidemic
  • The health and economic burden of tobacco use
  • The tobacco industry is not an industry like any other.
• Governments' responsibility in perpetuating the tobacco epidemic
• The clear links between the WHO Framework Convention and human rights
• Switzerland's role in the global tobacco epidemic
• The instrumentalization of human rights by the tobacco industry
• Investment by tobacco manufacturers in the Swiss associative and cultural fabric
• Manipulation of scientific studies leading to global repercussions
• Tobacco industry benefits from Switzerland's many trade agreements
• Making Switzerland responsible

Smoking, an industrial epidemic

The health and economic burden of tobacco use

The tobacco epidemic is one of the greatest public health threats the world has ever faced, killing more than 8 million people each year. Smoking is the leading preventable premature cause of death worldwide. At the beginning of the last century, it was estimated that without radical action, the total number of tobacco-related deaths in the 21st century could exceed one billion, ten times the number of tobacco-related deaths in the 20th century. On average, smoking reduces the life expectancy of smokers by 10 years.

Tobacco is also responsible for considerable economic losses. Worldwide, about a quarter of productive life years are lost due to disability from tobacco-related diseases. A study published in 2016[2] The WHO estimated the total global cost of tobacco use (healthcare expenditure and productivity losses combined) at $1,436 billion at purchasing power parity, or about $1.8 billion of global GDP. Tobacco also exacerbates poverty, economic inequality and food insecurity at the personal and family levels, reducing resources available for health care, education and nutrition.

The tobacco industry is not an industry like any other.

Smoking is not a threat to global health like any other. As WHO states "Infectious diseases don't employ public relations firms. There are no front groups promoting the spread of cholera. Mosquitoes don't have lobbyists."[3]. The tobacco epidemic is an industrial epidemic caused by the tobacco industry.

The tobacco industry employs a plethora of tactics to prevent, delay, and undermine policies to reduce tobacco use, including direct lobbying, front groups, public relations campaigns, political campaign financing, tobacco industry representation on delegations of parties to the Framework Convention on Tobacco Control (WHO FCTC), manipulation of scientific research, exploitation of “corporate social responsibility” initiatives, smuggling, and bribery. The industry has also been convicted by U.S. federal prosecutors under the RICO Act, which combats organized crime.[4].

As a Philip Morris executive said at an internal meeting in 1995,[5] : "Our goal is to help create regulatory environments that enable our companies to achieve their goals wherever they operate. Our overall approach to these issues is to vigorously fight, with all available resources, any attempt, from anywhere, to reduce our ability to manufacture our products efficiently and market them effectively.... In short, we are very clear about our goal - an unyielding and aggressive defense of our rights to manufacture and sell our products."

Governments' responsibility in perpetuating the tobacco epidemic

According to the report’s authors, governments share responsibility for the ongoing tobacco epidemic. Proven measures, such as tax increases, advertising bans, and smoking bans in public and communal areas, are known to reduce and end the tobacco epidemic, as exemplified by the WHO Framework Convention on Tobacco Control. The FCTC is a public health treaty with 183 parties worldwide. The 2021 Global Progress Report on Implementation of the Convention highlights that "Despite the progress made, implementation problems remain and prevent the convention from producing its full effects". Noting that lack of financial resources and interference from the tobacco and nicotine industry are the most frequently mentioned obstacles[6].

Governments not only have the right to regulate or even ban the tobacco trade; they have a duty to do so based on human rights principles. The rights to life and health (and several other rights affected by the industry’s actions) are deeply rooted in global human rights standards. There is also a duty to protect against harm caused by third parties, including domestic and transnational corporations, at home and abroad.

The United Nations Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights provide guidelines for states and businesses to prevent, address and remedy human rights abuses in the context of business activities. They are sometimes referred to as the “Ruggie Principles.”[7], in honour of their author. They were proposed and drafted by the UN Special Representative for Business and Human Rights, John Ruggie, during his term from 2005 to 2011, and were endorsed by the UN Human Rights Council in June 2011.

The authors argue that the mere act of allowing a government to produce and market tobacco products is a direct violation of human rights. The Danish Institute for Human Rights also concluded in its assessment of Philip Morris International:[8] :

"Tobacco is profoundly harmful to human health and there is no doubt that the production and marketing of tobacco are irreconcilable with the right to health. For the tobacco industry, the United Nations Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights therefore require that the production and marketing of tobacco be stopped."

The clear links between the WHO Framework Convention and human rights

Although the Framework Convention on Tobacco Control (FCTC) is not a human rights treaty, it is related to them. In developing the world’s first public health treaty, the authors of the FCTC drew on human rights agreements to illustrate their provisions and provide substantive legal insights. This connection is evident in the text of the FCTC, which cites Article 12 of the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights and the WHO Constitution in recognition of the fundamental right of every human being to the enjoyment of the highest attainable standard of physical and mental health. References to human rights have also been included in several FCTC decisions and guidelines. At the most recent Conference of the Parties to the FCTC, COP 10, parties adopted decision FCTC/COP10(20) – Contribution of the WHO FCTC to the promotion and realization of human rights. The decision recalls that "The right to the enjoyment of the highest attainable standard of physical and mental health is a driving force behind the implementation of the WHO FCTC" and encourages “Parties to consider including WHO FCTC principles and implementation efforts when engaging with UN human rights mechanisms.”

Switzerland's role in the global tobacco epidemic

In Switzerland and internationally, the tobacco industry is doing everything it can to undermine prevention policies, particularly by targeting young people and vulnerable communities in its marketing strategies. The manufacture and sale of tobacco products also harms the environment throughout the industry's production and supply chain.

The rights to life and health, as well as other fundamental rights, are firmly anchored in international treaties, including the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR), the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (ICESCR), the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR) and the Convention on the Rights of the Child (CRC), all of which have been ratified by Switzerland. Switzerland is therefore committed to protecting and promoting these rights. However, it fails to do so when it comes to tobacco. Switzerland’s failure to implement tobacco prevention policies whose effectiveness is scientifically recognized and advocated by all public health authorities, or in other words, Switzerland’s failure to protect the health of its population from the devastating effects of tobacco, constitutes a clear violation of its international obligations. Switzerland is home to the headquarters of two of the four largest tobacco multinationals: Philip Morris International (PMI) and Japan Tobacco International (JTI). JTI's headquarters is less than 200 meters from the Palais des Nations and less than a kilometer from the WHO headquarters (which houses the FCTC secretariat). British American Tobacco (BAT) is also present, and had a large tobacco factory in Boncourt that closed at the end of 2023.

Switzerland is a tobacco-friendly country. The country was ranked second to last in two recent international reports, one relating to the ranking of countries: the European Tobacco Control Scale 2021 (Switzerland is in 36th place out of 37), the other is the Global Tobacco Industry Interference Index 2023 which ranks Switzerland at 89^th range out of 90 countries studied. This situation is partly due to the fact that it is home to the tobacco industry. By providing a favourable business environment for tobacco multinationals, the Swiss Confederation is complicit in the human rights violations perpetrated by these companies, both in Switzerland and around the world, particularly in low-income countries, already affected by poverty and limited access to basic health services. By signing the FCTC in 2004, Switzerland demonstrated its initial intention to be bound by the objectives of the treaty, which include reducing tobacco consumption, preventing tobacco-related diseases and protecting public health. However, by not ratifying the treaty and not taking adequate measures to implement the treaty's provisions, Switzerland is, according to the authors of the report, weakening the spirit and impact of the FCTC, both within its own borders and in other countries.

These point out that the FCTC aims to provide a comprehensive approach to tobacco control on a global scale. When countries like Switzerland, which has considerable influence and resources, do not fully commit to these goals, the collective effort to combat the global tobacco epidemic is weakened. By not fully complying with the FCTC, Switzerland sends mixed messages to other countries that may discourage them from adopting tobacco control measures. This lack of commitment by the country can be perceived as a lack of political will or legitimacy to act, which can influence the actions of other countries.

The FCTC sets international standards for tobacco control. When a country with advanced health systems and a strong international reputation like Switzerland fails to meet these standards, it risks unintentionally weakening the importance and credibility of these standards on the world stage.

The instrumentalization of human rights by the tobacco industry

Tobacco companies have long declared themselves to be strong advocates of human rights. They communicate openly on these issues in a variety of contexts, such as their own human rights reports, on their websites, or in the media. Their rhetoric and conclusions on human rights almost always work to their advantage, as they often claim to show how their company contributes to the protection and achievement of human rights goals.

Japan Tobacco International (JTI), headquartered in Geneva, for example, has set out core human rights principles that include the right to information on the health risks associated with product use, the right to adequate and optimal child development by preventing young people from accessing tobacco products, the right to health through access to reduced-risk products (heated tobacco and vaping products), and the right to a healthy environment by protecting non-smokers from second-hand smoke. With regard to preventing young people from accessing tobacco, JTI asserts that all stakeholders must work together to achieve this goal, while trying to lobby the Swiss government against any changes to tobacco control policy aimed at achieving this goal.

British American Tobacco claims to operate in accordance with its Standard of Business Conduct, including no child labour in tobacco farming, freedom of association and no labour exploitation or modern slavery. BAT is responding to public accusations of human rights abuses on its website, and has contested cases where the tobacco company has been implicated, including in Belarus in 2021 and Malawi and Italy in 2019. A recent United Nations report showed that many children under the age of 14 working on tobacco farms in Malawi are still out of school and have not returned to school following the COVID-19 pandemic, when more than 400,000 students dropped out of school.[9].

In 2021, several thousand Malawian tobacco farmers filed a class action lawsuit for forced labor against two tobacco multinationals, British American Tobacco (BAT) and Imperial Brands (IB). The farmers specifically denounced working conditions that amount to forced labor, coerced labor, and exploitation, as defined by Malawian law.

Manufacturer PMI has integrated the language of human rights into its corporate culture, particularly in its internal policies, but also by referring to international standards in force in all its areas of activity. Respect for human rights is a theme that is part of PMI's strategic pillar. PMI openly states that respect for human rights is a business decision. PMI wants to reduce financial or legal risks by guaranteeing the human rights of its employees and partners (such as communities or stakeholders). On the "Human Rights" page of its website, the company clearly states its goal of a smoke-free future. PMI's core principles on human rights focus, for example, on strict control of its products, its fight against forced or child labor, its concerns about the fair treatment of workers and the right to freedom of association. In June 2023, Philip Morris published its first “Human Rights Report,” which aims to “describe [its] human rights strategy and progress to date.”

Tobacco manufacturers, who play a central role in deliberately keeping tobacco farmers in precarious conditions, regularly communicate to highlight their commitment to combating child labor. To do this, they rely on self-declarations relating to their agricultural practices and their supply chain audits. They also report on their initiatives to combat child labor, which are mainly taken from the documents of the Foundation for the Elimination of Child Labor in Tobacco Cultivation, based in Geneva. This organization is funded by the tobacco industry. It is therefore a pure communication strategy on the part of the industry, intended to rehabilitate its image. The challenge is to protect the reputation of these tobacco companies and to position them as "socially responsible" players.

Investment by tobacco manufacturers in the Swiss associative and cultural fabric

The Swiss government also embraces many of the industry’s CSR initiatives. Cigarette maker JTI established the JTI Foundation, a charity whose stated goal is “to help less privileged people and victims of natural or man-made disasters improve their quality of life.” In Switzerland, the JTI Foundation supports two organizations: International Social Service – Switzerland (which helps “vulnerable migrants interested in voluntary return after their asylum application has been rejected in Switzerland”), and REDOG (whose goal is to “develop and maintain disaster dog search capacity to enable rapid and effective deployments of search dog teams”). JTI also funds the Geneva-based Protestant Social Center, a charitable NGO whose goal is to “provide professional assistance to some 11,000 people living in precarious marginalization or isolation.”

Philip Morris has established a "charitable giving" program, renamed "social contributions." On its website, the company explains that "partnering with local groups to address social and economic challenges contributes to the success of the company." The beneficiary organizations in Switzerland that support the tobacco company's activities are Caritas Neuchâtel, Cartons du Cœur Neuchâtel, Centre social protestant Neuchâtel, Fondation "Victim Aid Zurich", Medair, RECIF, Free Ukraine and Projects with a Heart. The latter organization, Project with a Heart, is described on PMI's website as "a global grassroots movement, established and led by employees and supported by PMI."

Many key cultural institutions in Switzerland are also financially supported by tobacco companies, including but not limited to: In Geneva, the Grand Théâtre de Genève (public institution), the MAMCO Genève (Museum of Modern and Contemporary Art) and the Théâtre de Carouge, which receive money from JTI. The latter also finances the prestigious Verbier Classical Music Festival in the canton of Valais as a “community partner”. In Lausanne (Vaud), Philip Morris is a financial partner of Plateforme 10, which “houses the 3 Vaudois cantonal museums, mudac, Photo Elysée and the MCBA, as well as the collections of the Toms Pauli and Félix Vallotton foundations.

These "social contributions" and the sponsorship of cultural events and key institutions have deeply integrated the tobacco industry into the Swiss social fabric. The resulting high level of social acceptance allows the tobacco industry to extend its influence and makes it difficult for legislators to adopt strong and effective measures to combat smoking.

Manipulation of scientific studies leading to global repercussions

There are several blatant examples of funding for studies with distortion of results in science in Switzerland. The most famous example is that of Ragnar Rylander, a professor at the University of Geneva, who secretly accepted research funding from the tobacco industry, to the tune of US$184,000 per year, over a period of 30 years. This research resulted in results that downplayed the dangers of second-hand smoke. Rylander's links to Philip Morris were revealed by two whistleblowers, who accused Rylander of "unprecedented scientific fraud."

While the Rylander case took place over 20 years ago, other Swiss academics have more recently also put science to work for tobacco money. In 2014, Philip Morris funded two professors at the University of Zurich (UZH) who conducted misleading and flawed analyses of the effect of plain packaging on smoking prevalence in Australia. Their working papers were published on the UZH website without peer review and made available to Philip Morris. Philip Morris used them extensively in its campaign against plain packaging and in court, presenting them as proof that plain packaging was not effective.

The industry has also misrepresented scientific findings specific to Switzerland. For example, JTI responded to the results of a study highlighting the increased harmfulness of tobacco products manufactured in Switzerland and sold in other countries by claiming that “all tobacco products pose health risks.” In 2019, the NGO Public Eye[10] had revealed that Swiss tobacco companies were exporting cigarettes whose compositions did not comply with European obligations. Both in terms of nicotine content, the presence of attractive flavours, etc., which led to increased dependence among consumers. Swiss cigarettes sold in Africa, which are particularly popular in Morocco, are thus even more toxic than those sold in the European Union. Beyond the even greater toxicity of exported Swiss cigarettes, the levels measured by researchers do not match those indicated on the cigarette packet. This is particularly the case for the nicotine values contained in Moroccan cigarettes: Winston cigarettes contain almost 1.5 milligrams, while they display the figure of 1 mg.

Despite overwhelming scientific evidence, Geneva-based Japan Tobacco still denies that there is a causal link between exposure to second-hand smoke and lung cancer and other diseases, stating: “Based on current scientific evidence, JTI does not believe that ETS [environmental tobacco smoke] has been proven to cause diseases such as lung cancer, coronary heart disease, emphysema and chronic bronchitis.” JTI offers solutions that are proven to be ineffective, proclaiming that “JTI promotes practical and effective solutions, such as separate areas for smokers and non-smokers, that take into account the legitimate interests of smokers and non-smokers.”

Tobacco industry benefits from Switzerland's many trade agreements

The tobacco industry has taken advantage of Switzerland's extensive network of trade agreements to challenge - or threaten to challenge - tobacco control legislation in many other countries. The use of trade law has become an important part of the industry's strategy to thwart tobacco policy legislation, including restrictions brought about by the adoption of plain packaging.

Of particular importance are Switzerland’s 128 bilateral investment treaties (BITs) that are ripe for tobacco industry interference. The purpose of a BIT is to encourage foreign direct investment by providing companies with legal recourse if their investment is threatened due to actions by a foreign government. In traditional trade agreements, such as the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (GATT), only a state actor can bring legal action against another state. Under BITs, this right is granted directly to companies, without the need or even possibility for the host government to intervene.

A concrete example is the lawsuit filed by Philip Morris International against Uruguay's cigarette packaging law in 2011 under a BIT between Switzerland and Uruguay. This lawsuit cost the Uruguayan government approximately $10 million. PMI's costs amounted to approximately $17 million, demonstrating the company's willingness to undermine the implementation of effective tobacco control policies.

In 2008, Uruguay, a regional and global leader in implementing the FCTC, adopted two new provisions. The first required health warnings on cigarette packs covering 80% of the pack surface. The second required a “unique presentation” of different brands. Years earlier, Uruguay had banned misleading descriptors such as “light” and “low” on cigarette packs. The tobacco industry then turned to color coding, for example, “Marlboro Light” became “Marlboro Gold.” Following these decisions, PMI filed a lawsuit in 2010. Former Uruguayan President Tabaré Vásquez publicly called on Switzerland to pressure Philip Morris to withdraw its complaint. A Member of Parliament (Mr. Carobbio Guscetti) asked the Swiss Government whether Switzerland could amend the bilateral investment agreement to protect Uruguay's public health efforts by excluding dangerous products from the scope of the agreement. The Swiss Government rejected the request with the following explanation: "The exclusion of public interest regulatory measures as such or of entire economic sectors from the scope of the GATT would contravene the objective of these agreements, which is to protect foreign investments in all sectors against practices contrary to public international law."

Another example of this practice is PMI's legal challenge to Australia's plain packaging law under a BIT with Hong Kong, which also cost the Australian government $27 million.

Making Switzerland responsible

In light of these findings, the authors make a series of recommendations to the Swiss government. First and foremost, Switzerland should abandon its current doctrine of protecting the commercial interests of the tobacco industry to the detriment of public health. Switzerland should recognise as a higher public interest the primacy of protecting public health over the need for the tobacco industry to be able to market its deadly and addictive products.

Switzerland should therefore:

• Ratify the Framework Convention on Tobacco Control;
• Fully implement best practices set out in the Framework Convention on Tobacco Control, including, but not limited to, the following measures:
  • Preventing industry interference in tobacco control policies;
  • Prohibit all forms of advertising, sponsorship and promotion of tobacco;
  • Drastically reduce the number of points of sale for tobacco products;
  • Fully protect people from exposure to second-hand smoke;
  • Provide adequate support to citizens in smoking cessation;
  • Increase taxes on tobacco;
  • Stop exporting cigarettes, especially those that do not meet national and European standards;
  • Take measures to discourage or dissuade tobacco industry headquarters in Switzerland;
  • Take effective measures to protect the environment from the harmful effects of the tobacco industry and its products.

AE

[1] Human rights violations by tobacco multinationals in Switzerland and around the world, Transparency and Truth, Thematic Dossier No. 4 October 2024

[2] Goodchild M, Nargis N, Tursan d'Espaignet E. Global economic cost of smoking-attributable diseases. Tobacco Control. 2018 Jan;27(1):58-64. doi: 10.1136/tobaccocontrol-2016-053305,

[3] World Health Organization. July 2000. Report of the Committee of Experts on Tobacco Industry Documents July 2000. Tobacco Company Strategies to Undermine Tobacco Control Activities at the World Health Organization, https://iris.who.int/bitstream/handle/10665/67429/67429_eng.pdf?sequence=1

[4] Public Health Law Center. Oct 2017. Everything You Ever Wanted to Know about US v. Philip Morris But Were Afraid to Ask www.publichealthlawcenter.org/sites/default/files/resources/tclc-fs-DOJ-litigation-overview-2015.pdf

[5] Parrish S, Remarks by Steve Parrish, Senior Vice President, Worldwide Regulatory Affairs Philip Morris Companies INC. Worldwide Regulatory Affairs Issues Review, Prospects, and Plans, Philip Morris Board of Directors Sea Island Retreat, Sea Island, Georgia. https://www.industrydocuments.ucsf.edu/docs/rjbd0024

[6] Asia Pacific Observatory on Health Systems and Policies. 2022. 2021 Global Progress Report. https://apo.who.int/publications/i/item/9789240041769

[7] Ruggie, J. 2011. Report of the Special Representative of the Secretary General on the issue of human rights and transnational corporations and other business enterprises: Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights: Implementing the United Nations 'Protect, Respect and Remedy' Framework. Netherlands Quarterly of Human Rights, 29(2), 224-253. https://doi.org/10.1177/016934411102900206

[8] The Danish Institute for Human Rights. 2017. Human Rights assessment in Philip Morris International. https://www.humanrights.dk/news/human-rights-assessment-philip-morris-international

[9] Tobacco-free generation, Out-of-school children exploited in tobacco fields in Malawi, published on December 26, 2022, consulted on October 8, 2024

[10] Switzerland: the Eldorado of cigarette manufacturers in the heart of Europe, CNCT, published on February 19, 2019, consulted on October 8, 2024

National Committee Against Smoking |