MOUNTING public healthcare costs and the burden they present to the economy and the nation’s productivity have governments all over the world looking for ways to curb and hopefully reduce smoking in the population. Our country is no exception.

Few people dispute that cigarette smoking is damaging to human health, not just in Malaysia but globally. In this country, more than 27,200 smoking-related deaths are reported annually. 

Tobacco control comes at certain costs.

Implementing plans to prohibit the sale of cigarettes and tobacco products to people born after 2005 in a bid to outlaw smoking for the next generation requires funding to set up the mechanism. If Parliament approves the prohibition, the government has less than a year to come up with a mechanism. If implementation of the ban is weak, it serves no purpose. Haven’t we already tried and failed in implementing prohibition? Or this is yet another failed war?

Setting up a monitoring and enforcement mechanism to ensure compliance is not cheap. Even though the Health Ministry was the second largest recipient in Budget 2022, receiving RM32.4 billion, no mention was made to address the implementation of this plan to ban tobacco sales to those born after 2005.

As Malaysia is still trying to recover from economic devastation by the pandemic and floods, can the country afford to push forward with the ban knowing that costs to implement the mechanism could be substantial; especially when the funds could be better used to build national resilience to future pandemics?

A strategy aimed solely at deterring young people is not practical and is unlikely to bring significant public health benefits for at least the next 20 years. Most tobacco-related deaths that are projected to occur in the next 20 years would be among today’s smokers. 

Now, compare the introduction of this act to the drug problem in the country. Despite various actions and initiatives taken by the Malaysian government, including amending the Dangerous Drugs Act 1952 in 1983 to state that drug trafficking is punishable by death, the number of people abusing drugs keeps increasing each year.

Did the introduction of the death penalty in 1983 reduce or eradicate drug issues in Malaysia? 

According to statistics from the National Anti-Drug Agency, 131,841 drug addicts were registered in Malaysia between January 2010 and February 2016. From the total, drug abuse among youth aged 19 and below in the country amounted to 8,732 people. 

In 2018 alone, a total of 157,677 people were arrested under the drug act. In the same year, a total of 25,267 drug dependents were detected, with 17,474 new users and 7,793 relapsers.

In the same year, youth aged 19 to 39 dominated the number of drug dependents at 72.9% (18,417). 

The government spent over half a billion ringgit to imprison minor drug offenders in 2017 alone, and over RM200 million more to arrest and house addicts in state-run rehabilitation centres the same year.

These statistics prove that past and current public health measures in addressing drug abuse have not and are not working.

Thus, the extreme measure of prohibiting tobacco consumption among youth is likely to fail, too. 

The introduction of this ban is likely to incentivise imports of illicit tobacco products. Social supply then will play a more important role than commercial supply in youth gaining access to tobacco products. 

This may result in higher prices being charged for illicit tobacco, making illegal sales a more appealing proposition for organised criminals in the country. 

I just hope enough studies were undertaken before the implementation of this ban and the country is not aping New Zealand, which in December last year became the first country in the world to announce a similar law but for those born after 2008.

Drug abuse does not contribute to economic gain nor generate taxes for the country, but tobacco products provide tax revenue to the country, which is used to finance social and public amenities. 

So is the regulatory intervention of a complete ban justifiable? 

Smoking is considered an individual choice and a socially learned habit. Therefore, in ensuring people quit smoking for better health, it is necessary to identify tributary factors for smoking and reasons behind smokers relapsing despite being motivated to quit.

Interventions incorporating individual-based approaches, instead of ones directed at the community as a whole, are required for a long-term cessation of smoking habits in society.

* FLK reads The Malaysian Insight.

* This is the opinion of the writer or publication and does not necessarily represent the views of The Malaysian Insight. Article may be edited for brevity and clarity.