COP11 Debate Intensifies Over Global Ban on Novel Nicotine Products
At COP11 in Geneva, a bloc led by Brazil and the Maldives has proposed “prohibition” as the main policy direction, prompting amendments from the European Union seeking to preserve national regulatory autonomy.
Key Points
-
Draft Direction: Brazil, Maldives, Panama, and Thailand push for prohibiting the manufacture, import, sale, presentation, and use of e-cigarettes and nicotine pouches.
-
Scope of Controversy: The proposal covers ENDS, ENNDS, and nicotine pouches, drawing widespread attention.
-
EU Position: The EU opposes a universal ban and proposes changing “prohibit” to regulatory options that could include prohibition.
-
Legal Limitations: The EU stresses adding “as appropriate under national laws” to maintain member-state flexibility.
-
Core Conflict: COP11’s central dispute is whether to push for a global ban or allow nations to choose their own regulatory frameworks.
Background: COP11 Discussions on Emerging Nicotine Products
According to Pouch Patrol, Parties at COP11 are actively negotiating the draft decision under Agenda Item 4.5. This addresses emerging nicotine products such as e-cigarettes and nicotine pouches.
Central Question: Ban or Regulate?
The main controversy is whether the FCTC should explicitly endorse a global “ban” or leave regulation to individual countries’ legal frameworks.
Draft Proposal: Prohibition as the Primary Measure
The draft decision submitted by Brazil. The Maldives, Panama, and Thailand call for strict measures targeting novel nicotine products.
-
Paragraph 2(a)(i) recommends prohibiting or restricting the manufacture, import, distribution, presentation, sale, and use of ENDS, ENNDS, and nicotine pouches.
-
The proposal rejects the tobacco industry’s “harm reduction” arguments, framing them as attempts to avoid regulation.
EU Amendment: Prioritizing National Regulatory Flexibility
The EU’s formal position proposes significant changes to the draft wording.
-
Replacing “prohibiting or restricting” with “taking comprehensive regulatory measures, which could include prohibiting or restricting.”
-
Adding the qualifier “as appropriate under national laws” to ensure member states retain full legal discretion.
-
The EU maintains that measures to prevent nicotine addiction must align with each country’s regulatory system.
Analysis: Diverging Policy Philosophies
-
Original Draft: Centers on prohibition as the preferred policy, extending even to products legally sold in some countries.
-
EU Amendment: Focuses on preserving policy space, allowing nations to adopt strict regulations such as age limits or ingredient controls without mandating an outright ban.
