THE Control of Tobacco Products and Smoking Bill 2022, commonly known as the generational endgame (GEG) bill, which has the explicit aim of banning people born in 2007 and after from smoking, has far-reaching implications.

I get that minimising the smoking population will save us billions of ringgit public funds that are used to treat smoker’ diseases.

I am also aware of the perils of second-hand smoke.

The “soft-landing” approach of the policy, in that it would only be enforced in 2025, gives the government a window of three years to convince the younger generation of the harms of smoking.

Existing smokers, like me, will not be affected.

However, how could this be deemed a painless transition by the minors when they have practically zero say in the policy?

The bill is problematic because of the enforcement powers it confers that infringe on human rights principle and have potential for abuse.

For instance, authorities are to be given the power to frisk minors, access personal data, open their bags, and perform search and seizure without a warrant merely on the suspicion that these minors are in possession of tobacco?

A minor could be subjected to a body search and have his phone confiscated on suspicion of  possessing tobacco. Are we not going too far for the sake of keeping our children safe from the harms of smoking?

Even if there is no criminalisation, the fine, search, and investigation allowed to the authorities can confer stigmatisation, much like that which now surrounds drug addicts.

Some adherents of the bill are so fixated on passing the bill that they have downplayed the dangers of the extraordinary powers of enforcement.

They say there is no reason for minors to be afraid of the law being abused if they do not own or smoke tobacco.

However, the same logic could be applied to any law that is currently abused but which was purportedly passed for the good of society. The Security Offences (Special Measures) Act 2012  was touted as a law to address security issue. How did that turn out?

Also, it is almost certain that the majority of those who will be penalised under this law will be those who are poor and downtrodden.

This is another reason why I am sceptical about giving enforcement another excuse to infringe on people’s liberty and privacy.

With our enforcement remaining largely unaccountable, the only possible scenario that I could envisage after the passing of the bill is more abuse of power against the poor.

Finally, it is absurd when you see that it is the adults, whose right to smoke remains intact,  debating the law while the youth, who are the ones affected by it, have had no say.

Lawmakers, health practitioners, academicians and lobbyists are arguing among themselves and imposing our own ideals on the generations to come.

Has anybody bothered to ask any of the people born on and after 2007 what they think?

After all, they will be the ones living with the decision that we made in the name of protecting them. Don’t we owe it to them to at least consult them before the bill is passed?

The bill also raises the question of what kind of society Malaysians want to live in.

Are the young people of this country comfortable about the state intervening in their lives even as  some ultra-conservative groups are looking at the bill as a harbinger of further prohibition, especially of alcohol products.

Perhaps that is the most pertinent question and one that the future generations will be forced to confront should the bill see passage.

It is best that the young people take part in the debate.

After all, we have passed the Undi18 law. It is time for Malaysia to walk the talk about empowering the youth. – August 7, 2022.

* Kenneth Cheng has always been interested in the interplay between human rights and government but more importantly he is a father of two cats, Tangyuan and Toufu. When he is not attending to his feline matters, he is most likely reading books about politics and human rights or playing video games. He is a firm believer in the dictum “power concedes nothing without a demand. It never did and it never will”.

* 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.