Tobacco

Industry Interference Index

September 2017



The Philippine Report on the Implementation of Article 5.3 of
the WHO Framework Convention on Tobacco Control

(HealthJustice Logo)

(HealthJustice Logo)


Acknowledgment

This report is prepared by Atty. Irene Patricia Reyes with the research support of
Atty. Lia Magtibay, and Mr. Allan Chester Nadate.

HealthJustice, a non-stock, non-profit organization created to fulfill the vision

of bridging the gap between public health and law through policy development
and research. The organization is committed to be the leading resource in
research and capacity building for priority public health policies.

HealthJustice would like to thank New Vois Association of the Philippines

(NVAP) for their comments on the report.

The development of this report would not be possible without the tools, support,
and guidance provided Southeast Asia Tobacco Control Alliance (SEATCA).

For more information, please visit www.healthjustice.ph.

Permission to Reproduce

Except as otherwise specifically stated, the information in this publication may

be reproduced for non-commercial purposes, in part or in whole and by any
means, without charge or further permission from the authors, provided that
due diligence is exercised in ensuring the accuracy of the information
reproduced; that the authors are identified as the source of the information; and
that the reproduction is not presented as an official version of the information
reproduced, nor as having been made in affiliation with or with the endorsement
of HealthJustice, Inc.

2017
Copyright

HealthJustice, Inc.

Typeset in _______________________

Table of Contents

Introduction 1

Methodology 2

Tobacco Industry Interference Index 2

I. Tobacco Industry Participation in Policy Development 3

II. Industry- Related CSR Activities
III. Benefits of the Tobacco Industry
IV. Forms of Unnecessary Interactions
V. Transparency
VI. Conflict of Interest
VII. Preventive Measures

Recommendations








Tobacco Industry Interference Index
August 2017

The Philippine Report on the Implementation of

Article 5.3 of the WHO Framework Convention
on Tobacco Control

(HealthJustice Logo)

Introduction
It has been seven years since the Philippines has taken steps to address tobacco
industry interference in the government through the enactment of the policy
that aims to protect the bureaucracy against tobacco industry interference.1
Since then, several government agencies have committed to implement the said
policy and other measures to implement Article 5.3 of the Framework
Convention on Tobacco Control.

Once labeled as the country with the strongest tobacco lobby in Asia.2 This
report aims to look at the countrys progress or lack thereof in the
implementation of Article 5.3 and its Guidelines. The Tobacco Industry
Interference Index is an attempt to gauge the level of industry interference, as
well as the responses or measures implemented by the government to
implement Article 5.3 of the Framework Convention on Tobacco Control.

Article 5.3 of the FCTC aims to protect public health policies from tobacco
industry interference. The implementation of Article 5.3 is key in an effective
tobacco control program. To give more clarity to the provision, the Parties to the
FCTC unanimously adopted the Article 5.3 Guidelines in 2008. The Guidelines
provide for 8 main recommendations with 34 sub-recommendations to
governments to ensure that the industry is prevented from exerting its influence
on public health policy.

While the tobacco industry has been utilizing similar strategies around the world,
there has been little effort to measure and compare the response of the
government or its ability to respond to these strategies. The purpose of the
Index is to define the measures and elements that contribute to the ability of the
tobacco industry to interfere with policymaking. The assessment could provide
an indication of the governments capacity to resist tobacco industry
interference.

1
CSC-DOH Joint Memorandum Circular on the Protection of the Bureaucracy Against Tobacco Industry
Interference.
2
The Philippine tobacco industry: The strongest tobacco lobby in Asia by K. Alechnowicz and S. Chapman.

Methodology

This is the fourth report reviewing the implementation of the Philippines of

Article 5.3 of the WHO FCTC based on the Tobacco Industry Interference Index.
This report covered incidents of tobacco industry interference from January
December 2016. The previous reports covered incidents in 2009 2013, 2013
2014, and 2015.

The relevant evidence were gathered, reviewed, and scored based on the
questionnaire provided by Southeast Asia Tobacco Control Alliance (SEATCA).
Information sources for the research were based on publicly available or
commonly known information. The research was limited to information sourced
from official websites, news reports, tobacco company reports, and anecdotal
reports. The results were shared with a core group of tobacco control advocates
for review.

The questions were based on the top twenty (20) most commonly reported
incidents of tobacco industry interference in the Southeast Asian countries and
referenced to specific recommendations in the Article 5.3 Guidelines.

The questionnaire was updated in 2015 to quantify the intensity, frequency, or

severity of a given incident of interference by providing specific guides or
assessment tools on how to assess specific situations. The intent was to remove
the subjectivity by assigning a number, and put all respondents/ researchers on
the same page when assigning a score. The scores are ultimately compared with
results from other countries. However, because of the revision in scoring system,
it may not adequately capture the difference between the years.

Tobacco Industry Interference Index

The Tobacco Industry Interference Index is an attempt to define the measures
and elements that contribute to the ability of the tobacco industry to interfere
with public health policy making. The questions were designed based on specific
situations most applicable to the Southeast Asian nations context that the
Article 5.3 Guidelines seeks to address. The questions are grouped into seven
categories: (I) level of participation in policy development; (II) so-called CSR
activities; (III) benefits to the tobacco industry; (IV) forms of unnecessary
interaction; (V) transparency; (VI) conflict of interest; and (VII) preventive
measures.

The objective is to know whether the Philippines is making progress,
maintaining status quo, or deteriorating when addressing tobacco industry
interference. The scores serve as an indicator of the level of tobacco industry
interference based primarily on evidence available publicly as well as
stakeholders perception.

I. Tobacco Industry Participation in Policy

Development
INDICATORS 0 1 2 3 4 5
1. The government3 accepts, supports or endorses X
any offer for assistance by or in collaboration
with the tobacco industry 4 in setting or
implementing public health policies in relation
to tobacco control5 (Rec 3.1)

2. The government accepts, supports or endorses X

policies or legislation drafted by or in
collaboration with the tobacco industry. (Rec
3.4)

3. The government allows/ invites the tobacco X

industry to sit in government interagency/
multi-sectoral committee/ advisory group body
that sets public health policy (Rec 4.8)

1 Never 5 Yes
4. The government nominates or allows X
representatives from the tobacco industry
(including State-owned) in the delegation to the
COP or other subsidiary bodies or accepts their

3
The term government refers to any public official whether or not acting within the scope of authority as
long as cloaked with such authority or holding out to another as having such authority
4
The term, tobacco industry includes those representing its interests or working to further its interests,
including the State-owned tobacco industry.
5
Offer of assistance may include draft legislation, technical input, recommendations, oversees study tour

 sponsorship for delegates. (i.e. COP 4 & 5, INB 4
5, WG)6 (Rec 4.9 & 8.3)

The tobacco industry continues to participate in tobacco control policy development

and implementation. The Philippine Tobacco Institute (PTI) and the National
Tobacco Administration (NTA) are members of the Inter-Agency Committee
Tobacco (IACT), which is tasked to implement provisions of the Tobacco Regulation
Act 7 and monitor compliance with the Graphic Health Warnings Law. 8 A
representative from the National Tobacco Administration attended the COP7
last November 2016 and was part of the Philippine delegation. National Tobacco
Administration is a government agency that promotes and supports tobacco
agriculture and furthers the interests of the tobacco industry.

Different business groups, including the tobacco industry, formed an alliance

called as Fight Illicit Trade Movement (Fight IT). Fight IT intends to collaborate
with and assist the National Bureau of Investigation in implementing measures
against illicit trade.

II. Industry- Related CSR Activities

INDICATORS 0 1 2 3 4 5
5. A. The government agencies or its officials
endorses, supports, forms partnerships with or
participates in so-called CSR activities
organized by the tobacco industry. (Rec 6.2)

B. The government (its agencies and officials)

receives contributions9 (monetary or otherwise)

6
Please annex a list since 2009 so that the respondent can quantify the frequency,
http://www.who.int/fctc/cop/en/
7
Republic of the Philippines. Republic Act No. 9211. (2003, June 23). AN ACT REGULATING THE
PACKAGING, USE, SALE, DISTRIBUTION AND ADVERTISEMENTS OF TOBACCO PRODUCTS AND FOR
OTHER PURPOSES. The Official Gazette. Retrieved from http://www.gov.ph/2003/06/23/republic-act-no-
9211/.
8
Republic of the Philippines. Republic Act No. 10643. (2014, July 15). AN ACT TO EFFECTIVELY INSTILL
HEALTH CONSCIOUSNESS THROUGH GRAPHIC HEALTH WARNINGS ON TOBACCO PRODUCTS. The
Official Gazette. Retrieved from http://www.gov.ph/2014/07/15/republic-act-no-10643/.

9
political, social financial, educations, community, technical expertise or training to counter smuggling or
any other forms of contributions

 from the tobacco industry (including so-called
CSR contributions). (Rec 6.4)

WHO FCTC and its Guidelines recommend that Parties ban so-called corporate social
responsibility (CSR) activities of tobacco companies, as it is a means to access and
influence policymakers and continue to advertise tobacco products or brand.

Since the enactment of the Department of Health Civil Service - Commission Joint
Memorandum Circular on the Protection of the Bureaucracy Against Tobacco
Industry Interference in 2010 (DOH-CSC JMC), there has been a marked decrease of
partnerships and unnecessary interactions between the government and the
tobacco companies. However, the tobacco industry was able find ways to
circumvent the policy. Tobacco companies continued conducting CSR activities and
adjust their strategy by coursing the funds through foundations, civil society
organizations, and other groups such as the American Chamber of Commerce of the
Philippines (AmCham).

In 2016, most of the so-called CSR activities were done by the CSR arm of Mighty
Corporation, Wong Chu King Foundation. The foundation engaged in several
activities such as school feeding, donations to police stations, and schools.
Compared with 2015, there has been no decrease in so-called CSR activities by the
tobacco industry or its groups. This means that advocates need to do more work in
exposing the link between the tobacco companies and these private foundations or
groups.

III. Benefits of the Tobacco Industry

INDICATORS 0 1 2 3 4 5
6. The government accommodates requests from X
the tobacco industry for a longer time frame for
implementation or postponement of tobacco
control law. (e.g. 180 days is common for PHW,
Tax increase can be implemented within 1
month) (Rec 7.1)

7. The government gives privileges, incentives, X

exemptions or benefits to the tobacco industry
(Rec 7.3)

Philip Morris has a regional tobacco leaf warehouse in Subic, a free port zone10 and a
manufacturing facility in First Philippine Industrial Park, an economic zone
operated by PEZA. The tobacco industry gains advantage by operating in these areas
as they are granted lower taxes or duties. The incentives are given to any business
operating in the Philippines, but because of Article 5.3 of the FCTC, the government
should consider making an exception in the case of the tobacco industry.

IV. Forms of Unnecessary Interactions

INDICATORS 0 1 2 3 4 5
8. Top level government officials (such as X
President/ Prime Minister or Minister 11 ) meet
with/ foster relations with the tobacco
companies such as attending social functions
and other events sponsored or organized by the
tobacco companies or those furthering its
interests. (Rec 2.1)

9. The government accepts assistance/ offers of X

assistance from the tobacco industry on
enforcement such as conducting raids on
tobacco smuggling or enforcing smoke free
policies or no sales to minors. (including
monetary contribution for these activities) (Rec
4.3)

10. The government accepts, supports, endorses, or X

enters into partnerships or agreements with the
tobacco industry. (Rec 3.1)

Unlike in previous years, there has been no publicly recorded meetings between
top-level officials and the tobacco industry.

There was a recorded partnership between the government and the tobacco
industry in 2016. A summit on climate change and its effects on agriculture was

10
(2009, August 25). Philip Morris expands Subic facility by 4x. ABS-CBN News. Retrieved from
http://news.abs-cbn.com/business/08/24/09/philip-morris-expands-subic-facility-4x.

11
Include immediate members of the families of the high level officials

organized by Philip Morris Fortune Tobacco Corporation (PMFTC), an affiliate of
Philip Morris International (PMI), and the American Chamber of Commerce of
the Philippines Inc. (AmCham), with 234 participants which included town and
city mayors, LGU representatives, farmer leaders, and representatives from the
provincial and municipal agriculture offices. The lecturers and workshop
materials were from the Department of Agriculture Head Office, DA Region 8,
DA Region V, Caraga State University in Mindanao, the Philippine Atmospheric,
Geophysical and Astronomical Services Administration, and the United Nations
Food and Agriculture Organization.

V. Transparency
INDICATORS 0 1 2 3 4 5
11. The government does not publicly disclose X
meetings/ interactions with the tobacco industry
in cases where such interactions are strictly
necessary for regulation. (Rec 2.2)

12. The government requires rules for the disclosure X

or registration of tobacco industry entities,
affiliated organizations, and individuals acting
on their behalf including lobbyists.

The DOH-CSC JMC requires government agencies to report or disclose interactions

with the tobacco industry. The CSC does not have full information about meetings or
interactions of other agencies with the tobacco industry. Two conclusions can be
made from the lack of reports, either there are no meetings or interactions with the
tobacco industry or the government agencies are not complying with the
requirement to submit reports. There needs to be an improvement in monitoring
transparency provisions of the JMC with regard to this issue.

VI. Conflict of Interest

INDICATORS 0 1 2 3 4 5
13. The government does not prohibit contributions X
from the tobacco industry or any entity working
to further its interests to political parties,

 candidates, or campaigns or to require full
disclosure of such contributions. (Rec 4.11)
1 Never 5 Yes

14. Retired senior government officials form part of X

the tobacco industry (former Prime Minister,
Minister, Attorney General) (Rec 4.4)

15. Current government officials and relatives hold X

positions in the tobacco business including
consultancy positions. (Rec 4.5, 4.8, 4.10)

There are former government officials that are now working with tobacco
companies. Former Solicitor General Estrelito Mendoza is counsel of Lucio Tan, the
Chairman of PMFTC. Retired General Edilberto Adan is the Director and President of
Mighty Corporation while retired Judge Oscar Barrientos is the Executive Vice
President of Mighty Corporation.

There was no information available about current government officials working in

tobacco companies.

VII. Preventive Measures

INDICATORS 0 1 2 3 4 5
SCORING for this section: 1. Yes, 2. Yes but partial only, 3. Policy/
Program being developed 4. Committed to develop such a policy/
program 5. None
16. The government has put in place a procedure for X
disclosing the records of the interaction (such as
agenda, attendees, minutes and outcome) with
the tobacco industry and its representatives.
(Rec 5.1)

17. The government has formulated, adopted or X

implemented a code of conduct for public
officials, prescribing the standards with which
they should comply in their dealings with the
tobacco industry. (Rec 4.2)

18. The government requires the tobacco industry X

 to periodically submit information on tobacco
production, manufacture, market share,
marketing expenditures, revenues and any other
activity, including lobbying, philanthropy,
political contributions and all other activities.
(5.2)

19. The government has a program / system/ plan to X

consistently 12 raise awareness within its
departments on policies relating to FCTC Article
5.3 Guidelines. (Rec 1.1, 1.2)

20. The government has put in place a policy to X

disallow the acceptance of all forms of
contributions/ gifts from the tobacco industry
(monetary or otherwise) including offers of
assistance, policy drafts, or study visit
invitations given or offered to the government,
its agencies, officials and their relatives. (3.4)

There are preventive measures in place to implement Article 5.3 of the FCTC. The
DOH and the CSC issued the JMC in 2010, which applies to all officials and
employees of the government. The JMC prohibits interaction with the tobacco
industry unless strictly necessary for its effective regulation. Where there is a
necessary interaction with the tobacco, the JMC requires transparency in
interactions with the tobacco industry through submission of reports or minutes of
meetings that can be publicly accessible.

It also provides for a code of conduct prescribing the standards when dealing with
the tobacco industry, prohibits receiving gifts or any contributions from the tobacco
industry. It also requires each agency to raise awareness about the addictive and
harmful nature of tobacco products, tobacco industry interference with tobacco
control policies, and the true purpose and scope of activities described as socially
responsible.

In the past years, the CSC, DOH, and other tobacco control groups have been
conducting capacity building workshops in different regions in order to raise
awareness about Article 5.3, tobacco industry interference, and the requirements
under the JMC. Due to the combined efforts, other agencies in the government have

12
For purposes of this question, consistently means: a. Each time the FCTC is discussed, 5.3 is explained.
AND b. Whenever the opportunity arises such when the tobacco industry intervention is discovered or
reported.

also adopted their own policies implementing Article 5.3, rejected donations from
the tobacco industry, and terminated previous partnerships with the industry.

There are other policies that aim to implement Article 5.3:

DOH Department Memorandum 2010 0126;
DepEd Order No. 6 Guidelines on the adoption and implementation of
public health policies on tobacco control and protection against tobacco
industry interference;
Department of Labor and Employment Memorandum reiterating the JMC;
Bureau of Internal Revenue Memorandum Order No. 16-2012 restricting
interactions with the tobacco industry;
Department of Foreign Affairs Memorandum directing compliance with the
JMC; and
Metro Manila Development Authority Memorandum amending their Code of
Conduct to include protection of the MMDA against tobacco industry
interference.

Recommendations

While there have been strides in implementation of policies to prevent tobacco
industry interference, we need to address new and continued challenges that
prevent the full implementation of Article 5.3 of the FCTC. The strategy is two-fold;
firstly, a more efficient implementation of current policies, and secondly, the
enactment of stricter laws to address the loopholes.

As a clear example, while policies implementing Article 5.3 have been successful in
prohibiting unnecessary interactions with the tobacco industry and prohibiting
donations to government agencies. The limited scope creates a loophole and an
opportunity for the industry to use their foundations, private groups, or other civil
society organizations to continue conducting and publicizing its so-called CSR
activities.

The tobacco companies have circumvented the policies through indirect
partnerships, where the partnership is not between the government and the tobacco
companies but between the government and front groups of the tobacco industry.
To address this, there has to be swifter response to denormalize these so-called CSR
activities and conduct more efforts to raise awareness about front groups of the
tobacco industry, such as having a list of front groups to guide the government, and
warn which groups have connections with the tobacco industry.

Transparency in dealing with the tobacco industry should be improved further.
There should be strict monitoring and reporting of meetings. A possible measure is
to enforce compliance with the reporting and transparency provisions in the JMC

related to submission of information or reports about meetings or interactions with
the tobacco industry. This will complement as well as strengthen existing
mechanisms of monitoring of the implementation of the JMC.

There is also a continuing need for vigilance. Advocates need to be more active in
exposing tobacco industry tactics in order to shed light and contribute to the
denormalization of tobacco industry strategies. Civil society organizations need to
provide support, where needed, to help the government in addressing the issues.
Raising awareness and strengthening communication and advocacy strategies will
greatly help.