ABUJA — The Nigeria Tobacco Control Community, a coalition comprising more than 100 civil society organisations and public health advocates, has rejected the proposed National Tobacco Control Act (Amendment) Bill 2025, warning that some of its provisions could weaken existing protections against tobacco and nicotine products in Nigeria.
The coalition made its position known at a press briefing in Abuja on Monday, where it called on the National Assembly to withdraw the bill and subject it to a comprehensive, transparent and public health-focused review.
The groups said they supported efforts to strengthen and update the National Tobacco Control Act 2015 and its 2019 Regulations but expressed concern over provisions in the proposed amendment which, they argued, could create regulatory loopholes for tobacco and nicotine companies.
Speaking at the briefing, the Executive Director of Corporate Accountability and Public Participation Africa (CAPPA), Akinbode Oluwafemi, described the proposed amendments as a “sham”, alleging that they could provide opportunities for tobacco and nicotine companies to expand their activities in the country.
Particular concerns were raised over provisions relating to non-combustible tobacco and nicotine products, including electronic cigarettes, heated tobacco products and nicotine pouches.
The coalition said Clause 1(n), which introduces “tobacco harm reduction objectives”, could be used to promote newer nicotine products under the argument that they are less harmful than conventional tobacco products.
It also criticised Clause 16, which seeks to exclude non-combustible products from the definition of tobacco products.
According to the coalition, heated tobacco products contain actual tobacco and should therefore remain subject to tobacco-control regulations.
“Heated tobacco products contain real tobacco. Heating it instead of burning it does not remove its toxicity,” the groups said.
The coalition also expressed opposition to Clause 7, which it said would permit advertising of non-combustible products in adult publications, at points of sale, online and through event sponsorship.
It argued that defining an adult publication as one in which at least 50 per cent of the readership consists of adults could still leave children exposed to tobacco and nicotine advertising.
The groups further raised concerns about Clause 9, which would remove the prohibition on internet and mail-order sales of non-combustible products where age-verification measures are applied.
They argued that age-verification systems could be circumvented, creating opportunities for adults to purchase the products on behalf of minors.
The proposed changes to health warnings also came under scrutiny.
The coalition alleged that Clause 12 would reduce the warning requirements for vapes to text occupying not more than 30 per cent of the packaging, while nicotine pouches would carry warnings covering only 10 per cent of their packaging.
It further claimed that e-cigarette devices could be excluded from the health-warning requirement under the proposed amendment.
The coalition also criticised Clause 10, alleging that it would delete specific penalties for selling tobacco products to minors and for violating packaging requirements.
Another major concern was the Third Schedule, which the groups said could allow manufacturers to generate their own safety data while requiring the Minister of Health to keep the information confidential.
The coalition argued that such an arrangement could limit public scrutiny and independent assessment of the safety information submitted by manufacturers.
It also opposed Paragraph 21, which it said would give the Minister of Health the power to exempt certain products “in the public interest” without clearly defined criteria.
According to the coalition, several of the controversial provisions were not contained in the original HB 47 and HB 1151 versions presented during a public hearing on November 22, 2024.
The groups questioned how the provisions emerged and whether relevant public health institutions and stakeholders were consulted before their inclusion.
“Who introduced these provisions? Which public-health institutions reviewed them? The public has been completely excluded,” the coalition asked.
Despite its objections, the coalition acknowledged some provisions of the proposed amendment which it considered positive.
These include the proposed extension of smoke-free zones to 30 metres around schools and hospitals, as well as the proposed inclusion of the Nigeria Police and the Ministry of Youth in the Tobacco Control Committee.
However, the groups maintained that the positive provisions were insufficient to offset what they described as potentially harmful changes contained in the bill.
The coalition consequently called on the National Assembly to recall the bill and subject it to a public health-led review.
It also demanded the publication of all relevant reports, submissions and documents used in the amendment process to enable Nigerians and public health stakeholders to scrutinise the proposed legislation.
The groups further urged the Federal Ministry of Health to publicly clarify its position on the bill and, where necessary, call for its recall if the ministry was not adequately consulted during the legislative process.
They also appealed to President Bola Tinubu not to assent to the bill if it is transmitted to him in its current form.
Speaking separately, the in-country coordinator of the Campaign for Tobacco-Free Kids, Michael Olaniyan, cautioned against using the concept of harm reduction to weaken existing tobacco-control measures.
“Harm reduction is not harm elimination. What we want is to eliminate, not reduce,” Olaniyan said.
The coalition called for the development of a single, product-neutral tobacco-control law that would cover all tobacco and nicotine products.
It insisted that restrictions on advertising, sponsorship, product sampling and online sales should apply across the sector, regardless of the form in which the tobacco or nicotine product is presented.
The groups also urged Nigerians, particularly parents, health workers, young people and media organisations, to take an active interest in the proposed legislation and speak out against what they described as attempts to weaken public health protections.
They maintained that any amendment to Nigeria’s tobacco-control framework should prioritise public health, protect children and young people from nicotine addiction, and be subjected to broad and transparent consultation.
