TobaccoReporter logo

Tag: COP11

  • New Zealand’s Conflicting Awards Panned by CAPHRA

    New Zealand’s Conflicting Awards Panned by CAPHRA

    Last week, Ben Youdan of New Zealand’s Action for Smokefree 2025 (ASH NZ) received the Orchid Award at the 2025 E-Cigarette Summit in the UK for promoting evidence-based public health policy and a regulated vaping approach that has led to the country’s 60% reduction in adult smoking—down to 6.8%—negligible youth smoking, declining youth vaping, and sharp reductions in smoking among Māori women. In a press release today (December 15), the Coalition of Asia Pacific Tobacco Harm Reduction Advocates (CAPHRA) pointed to the striking contrast in recent recognition as New Zealand’s tobacco control work was given a “Dirty Ashtray” slight in November by the WHO FCTC at COP11.

    “This shows the world is splitting into two camps: those pursuing public health outcomes, and those pursuing pharmaceutical and billionaire interests,” said CAPHRA executive coordinator of Nancy Loucas. “This juxtaposition is perfect. The FCTC punishes New Zealand for achieving 6.8% smoking rates through harm reduction. Meanwhile, international public health leaders recognize our advocates for defending evidence-based policy against ideological capture.”

    CAPHRA accused FCTC institutions of ideological capture that are skewing policy against vaping and other harm reduction tools. The group questioned the value of FCTC membership for countries like New Zealand that are achieving strong results, warning that continued opposition to harm reduction risks undermining the treaty’s credibility and its original mandate to improve public health outcomes.

  • EU Document Leak Raises Questions Over COP11 Push

    EU Document Leak Raises Questions Over COP11 Push

    According to The European Times, industry observers are questioning the EU’s conduct at the WHO’s COP11 meeting after a leaked document showed Brussels pushing for far stricter language on novel nicotine products than member states had approved.

    “A leaked internal document later revealed that EU officials had encouraged the delegation to support language promoting prohibitions or strict limitations on all novel nicotine products,” the article said. “Once the document circulated among delegations, several member states described the situation as a procedural breach and questioned whether the Commission and the Danish EU Council Presidency were attempting to secure outcomes in Geneva that lacked consensus among governments at home.”

    WHO officials and aligned NGOs advocated sweeping restrictions on vapes, heated tobacco, and nicotine pouches, including flavor limits, packaging rules, environmental mandates, and broader liability tools. According to the leaked text, EU officials privately urged support for prohibitions or severe limits on manufacturing, import, sale, and use of all emerging nicotine products—despite such wording having been removed from the EU’s formal mandate during internal negotiations.

    Many of the most restrictive COP11 proposals were ultimately scaled back or made voluntary, with broader measures postponed to COP12 in 2027. However, the controversy has intensified scrutiny over the EU’s role within WHO processes and the transparency of its negotiations on nicotine policy, according to The European Times.

  • HPW Says ‘Industry Interference’ Stalled COP Decisions

    HPW Says ‘Industry Interference’ Stalled COP Decisions

    In its overview of the Eleventh Conference of the Parties (COP11), Health Policy Watch said that “industry interference remains the main issue preventing concrete steps toward more effective control of new tobacco products.” The article said that despite extensive debate, delegates failed to reach a consensus on issues such as plastic cigarette filters and disclosure requirements, opting instead for informal consultations, blaming outside forces that influenced delegates who pitched “competing drafts.”  

    “We know very well what works and what doesn’t,” Filippos Filippidis, Chair of the Tobacco Control Committee at the European Respiratory Society and Associate Professor at the School of Public Health at Imperial College London, was quoted in the article “The problem is that because of interference and the big money that is involved, some countries remain reluctant to apply some of these policies.”

    According to Health Policy Watch, delegates agreed to increase state funding for domestic tobacco control programs, consider more forward-looking measures such as generational bans on cigarettes, and approved calling on Parties to consider stronger legislative action to deal with criminal and civil liability related to tobacco control.

    However, Health Policy Watch said the “most controversial topic,” which did not get settled, concerned the way new products, such as electronic and heated tobacco and nicotine products, should be addressed, which leads into the “harm-reduction” argument that many anti-tobacco advocates believe is Big Tobacco propaganda. Industry representatives argue that the controversy and contention could be reduced via open discourse with all interested parties, and often criticize the WHO Framework Convention on Tobacco Control (FCTC) for working in secrecy and prohibiting open dialogue.

    Andrew Black, Acting Head of the Secretariat, said the unsolved discussion would be addressed at COP12 in Armenia in 2027, while Gan Quan, senior vice president of Tobacco Control at the New York City-based Vital Strategies, gave little hope that outside input would be welcomed.

    “We saw an unprecedented level of industry interference at this COP,” Quan said. “In terms of the composition of the delegations, it’s a bit out of control. The goal for future progress is to do a better job in keeping the industry out of that discussion.”

  • Environment, Liability Remain Focus as COP11 Concludes

    Environment, Liability Remain Focus as COP11 Concludes

    The Eleventh session of the Conference of the Parties (COP11) to the WHO Framework Convention on Tobacco Control closed in Geneva after six days with a reported 1,600 participants and 160 Parties, delivering a series of major decisions aimed at strengthening global tobacco control. Delegates focused heavily on environmental protections, sustainable funding for tobacco control programs, and forward-looking regulatory strategies addressing emerging nicotine products.

    Among the more significant conclusions was a decision urging Parties to consider stricter regulation of tobacco and nicotine product components—including cigarette filters, electronic devices, and other materials that contribute to environmental pollution. COP11 also reaffirmed domestic resource mobilization as essential for sustainable tobacco control, and advanced efforts under Article 19 of the treaty, encouraging countries to strengthen civil and criminal liability mechanisms targeting the “harms caused by the tobacco industry.” Delegates further considered novel approaches allowed under Article 2.1, signaling readiness among Parties to adopt measures beyond the treaty’s minimum requirements.

    COP11 also adopted a decision calling for a total ban on the use and sale of all tobacco products and emerging nicotine products—including heated tobacco, e-cigarettes, disposable vapes, and nicotine pouches—across all United Nations premises worldwide. Discussions also emphasized the growing importance of Article 5.3, which shields policymaking from tobacco industry interference amid rising concerns about marketing tactics for new nicotine products. The conference concluded with the announcement that COP12 and the next Meeting of Parties to the Protocol to Eliminate Illicit Trade in Tobacco Products will convene in Yerevan, Armenia, in 2027.

  • Good Cop 2.0 Concludes with Focus on Prohibitionist Policies

    Good Cop 2.0 Concludes with Focus on Prohibitionist Policies

    The final day of Good COP 2.0 highlighted the global consequences of strict, prohibitionist tobacco control measures. Speakers drew attention to the rise in illicit trade, gang violence, and punitive enforcement, attributing these outcomes to policies like heavy taxation and rigid pre-market approval systems promoted under WHO guidelines, which often overlook scientific evidence and consumer behavior.

    “There is a portion of people that you’ll never reach by only appealing to the evidence,” said author Jacob Grier. “It’s also important to change the framing and shift the culture.”

    Panel discussions explored the real-world harms of fundamentalist approaches and stressed the importance of including consumer perspectives in policymaking. Experts also outlined frameworks for effective, humane nicotine regulation, including suggestions that U.S. reforms might require a partial repeal of the Tobacco Control Act and a more measured FDA approach.

    The event concluded with an open forum, allowing participants to reflect on the week’s discussions and emphasizing the urgent need for reform within the WHO’s FCTC framework to create balanced, evidence-based global tobacco policy.

    “Of the funds that are contributed to the WHO, a significant percentage goes to the FCTC Secretariat,” said professor Tikki Pangestu. “Only a small amount goes toward running the programs. Meanwhile, a growing percentage of WHO funding comes not from member nations, but from outside groups with dubious agendas.”

  • NPR Article Explores the THR Debate

    NPR Article Explores the THR Debate

    A new article by Gabrielle Emanuel and Arundathi Nair for NPR—titled Can Vaping Help Wean People Off Cigarettes? Anti-Smoking Advocates are Sharply Split—explores the debate over e-cigarettes, heated tobacco, and nicotine pouches as the WHO Tobacco Control Treaty meeting in Geneva concludes. The story examines the clash between advocates of harm reduction, who see these products as less harmful alternatives for smokers, and WHO and public health experts, who warn of risks to youth and non-smokers and accuse the industry of promoting nicotine addiction.

    The article highlights perspectives from prominent figures like Dr. Derek Yach, founder of the Foundation for a Smoke-Free World, and Professor Mike Cummings, both supporting harm reduction strategies, alongside WHO officials who stress potential harms and the need for strict regulation. It also explores the historical context of tobacco industry tactics and the ongoing tensions between science, policy, and ideology.

    “We ought to get the evidence and weigh it and debate it — and help guide the policies based on evidence, not on ideology,” Cummings concludes.

  • ‘Forward-Looking Measures’ Spark Tension at COP11

    ‘Forward-Looking Measures’ Spark Tension at COP11

    Each day after the COP11 sessions end, the Global Alliance for Tobacco Control (GATC) posts a bulletin online that includes various thoughts and information from the day, including “awards” for groups it either agrees or disagrees with. The focus of yesterday’s bulletin (November 19) centered around the 16 “forward-looking measures” related to Article 2.1 of the WHO FCTC.

    Apparently, the forward-looking measures discussion created some provocative conversation as the GATC awarded its “dirty ashtray” distinction “To all the Parties who—incorrectly and, quite astonishingly, in unison—insisted that the Article 2.1 Draft Decision would impose new obligations, when it simply ‘invites’ Parties to ‘consider’ the 16 forward-looking measures.”

    In the section of the bulletin written by Cassandre Bigaignon and Amélie Eschenbrenner, they wrote, “Honestly, after sitting through multiple statements warning of ‘new obligations,’ ‘attacks on sovereignty,’ and declarations of countries being ‘simply not ready’ to implement these forward-looking measures, we have to ask: Were we all reading the same document?

    “So when a delegation raises the concern of ‘imposed new obligations,’ it fundamentally misrepresents the document’s intent, which is to expand the toolbox, encourage innovation, and share best practices, not bind Parties to new requirements.”

    The authors finished that section foreshadowing the next, in which they criticized the European Union, saying, “Amidst this debate on progressive action, the European Union’s silence today sure was deafening.” In the section titled, The EU at a Crossroads: Strong Leadership or a Silence that Serves the Tobacco Industry, they wrote, “Without consensus, the EU could lose its ability to speak and negotiate as a bloc at COP11, with significant global consequences. A divided EU would signal weakened resolve precisely as tobacco and nicotine industries intensify interference, exploit regulatory gaps, and push narratives aimed at stalling public health advances.

    “The stakes extend far beyond EU diplomacy. Division or silence within the region would directly benefit an industry that thrives on regulatory uncertainty. As newer nicotine products rapidly expand across Europe under the guise of ‘harm reduction’ and legislative progress stalls, strong European leadership is urgently needed.

    “The EU must seize the opportunity to speak with one strong voice at COP11. The world is watching, and failure to act would hand the advantage to an industry fundamentally opposed to public health. Europe can still stand together, if it chooses to do so.”

    In its parallel bulletin that covers the information from COP11 that gets released, Copwatch responded by saying, “GATC’s bulletin begins by calling out the dissenting EU member states. This is curious because the deliberations around reaching the EU’s common position on COP are supposed to be private.  Whilst it is true that there have been several leaks relating to the doomed struggles to reach a common position—the so-called ‘forward-looking measures’ having provoked such a backlash—GATC’s privileged position should prevent it from revealing what should be confidential information.  

    “This section ends with the appeal that ‘the world is watching.’ Sorry to break this to you, GATC, but…thanks to the secretive nature of the COP meetings, thanks to there being more compelling events for the world’s media to focus on, and thanks to the fact that people who smoke have been so thoroughly stigmatized—no, the world is not watching. The world doesn’t care much about FCTC COP.  But actually, we suspect that suits you just fine.”  

  • Philippines Defends Tobacco-Growers at COP11

    Philippines Defends Tobacco-Growers at COP11

    The Philippine delegation at COP11 earned praise from agricultural and civil society groups for emphasizing the country’s sovereign right to evaluate proposed global measures according to national priorities and capacities. Ambassador Carlos Sorreta, head of the delegation, highlighted the need for “socially and economically responsible” transitions that protect communities dependent on tobacco cultivation, noting that the crop continues to support livelihoods across nearly 20 provinces.

    Sorreta underscored that FCTC guidance is non-binding and should complement existing national efforts rather than impose restrictions. Local organizations, including the Northern Luzon Alliance, applauded this stance, warning that measures such as ending government support, imposing quotas, or phasing out tobacco sales would be “unrealistic, overly punitive and incompatible with the country’s agricultural and economic realities,” potentially threatening rural livelihoods and linked industries.

    The Federation of Free Farmers echoed these concerns, noting tobacco’s critical role in sustaining rural communities. It commended the delegation for prioritizing farmers’ welfare, arguing that the approach reflects a clear understanding of on-the-ground realities and protects not only the economic stability of tobacco-growing regions but also the dignity and future of the families who rely on this crop.

  • CAPHRA Releases White Paper on THR in Asia Pacific

    CAPHRA Releases White Paper on THR in Asia Pacific

    The Coalition of Asia Pacific Tobacco Harm Reduction Advocates (CAPHRA) unveiled a new white paper, Harm Reduction Denied in Asia Pacific, during the “Asia Day” event at Good Cop 2.0 in Geneva, coinciding with FCTC COP11. The paper examines inconsistencies in WHO’s tobacco control approach across the SEARO and WPRO regions, drawing on official WHO data such as the Global Report on Trends in Tobacco Use 2000–2030 and the Global Health Observatory. It calls for reform in the application of harm reduction under the FCTC, proposing evidence-based policy solutions that align with public health objectives while respecting human rights principles. Among its recommendations are regulation rather than prohibition of safer nicotine products, inclusion of consumers and independent scientists in policymaking, and greater transparency and accountability in FCTC processes.

    CAPHRA emphasizes that denying harm reduction perpetuates preventable disease, encourages illicit trade, and undermines trust in public health systems. The white paper urges WHO member states at COP11 to reaffirm Article 1(d) of the FCTC by recognizing harm reduction as a key pillar of tobacco control and to adopt pragmatic, science-driven policies that protect lives. The full report is available here.

  • Opinion: WHO Wants 9x More Money to Control Tobacco. Don’t Pay!

    Opinion: WHO Wants 9x More Money to Control Tobacco. Don’t Pay!

    In an opinion piece published today (November 19) by The Kingston Whig Standard in Canada titled The WHO Wants Nine Times More Money to Control Tobacco. Don’t Pay!, economics professor Ian Irvine criticizes the World Health Organization’s COP11 for pursuing what he calls “nicotine authoritarianism” and seeking an 800% budget increase to eliminate nicotine use.

    “The WHO’s tobacco budget is just over $1 billion, much of it provided by a normally wonderful philanthropist, Michael Bloomberg,” Irvine writes. “But the WHO has been advertising it really needs $9 billion to do its job properly: eliminate nicotine use.

    “The WHO does not need this money. Regarding nicotine, it is a reactionary organization. It refuses to recognize the benefits of ‘new generation products’: e-cigarettes, oral pouches, and heated tobacco products.”

    The piece contends that WHO and many advocacy groups wrongly demonize NGPs, treating them as dangerous as cigarettes, while smoking rates are already plummeting in developed countries. Irvine urges harm-reduction strategies instead of prohibition,

    Irvine, who has had research funded by Global Action to End Smoking, concludes that empowering adults to choose reduced-risk products would accelerate declines in smoking, save lives, and expose the WHO’s restrictive approach as more about sustaining bureaucracy than advancing public health.

    “The challenge for scientists is twofold: speaking up for harm reduction at COP11, even at the risk of verbal bludgeoning by the sinecured interest groups,” Irvine wrote, “and continuing the struggle domestically against a dominant culture policed by self-appointed moral guardians whose harassment of all forms of nicotine serves primarily to delay more smokers’ transition to low-toxicity products.

    “As smoking declines dramatically … we could start distributing pink slips at the WHO.”