Background

Bangladesh signed the WHO Framework Convention on Tobacco Control (FCTC) in 2003, enacted the Tobacco Control Act in 2005, adopted Article 5.3 of the FCTC in 2008, amended the Act in 2013, and formulated implementing rules in 2015. In 2021, the Ministry of Health and Family Welfare initiated a second phase of strengthening the Tobacco Control Act.

For this purpose, a draft amendment was prepared, published on the website, stakeholder feedback was collected, and inter-ministerial meetings were held. In November 2024, the draft was placed before the Advisory Council for approval. The Council decided to form a high-powered committee and to revise the draft in line with the committee’s observations and recommendations before resubmitting it.

Accordingly, on 9 December 2024, a nine-member Advisory Council Committee was notified. Following multiple meetings, the committee revised and refined the draft. On 24 December 2025, the Smoking and Tobacco Products Use (Control) (Amendment) Ordinance, 2025 was approved at the Advisory Council meeting. Finally, with the consent of the Honorable President, the Ordinance was published in the Gazette and came into force on 30 December 2025.[1].

Tobacco Industry Interference and Tactics Surrounding the Law Amendment

Throughout this long process of strengthening the law, tobacco companies persistently employed various tactics and interventions. According to the Global Tobacco Industry Interference Index 2025, Bangladesh is among the countries most affected by tobacco industry interference worldwide and ranks worst in Asia.[2]

The study covered 100 countries, where Bangladesh ranked 66th (score: 69). By comparison, Nepal ranked 43rd, India 59th, Pakistan 54th, Sri Lanka 45th, and the Maldives 39th. Brunei performed best (1st, score: 14), while the Dominican Republic ranked worst (100th, score: 98). A lower score indicates better compliance with FCTC Article 5.3. Interference in Bangladesh has been particularly intense around the amendment of the Tobacco Control Act.

Selected Examples of Industry Tactics and Interference

Strategy 1: “Third-Party Technique”

Example 1: Policy Dialogue via the Intellectual Property Association of Bangladesh (IPAB)
On 28 July 2022, IPAB organized a policy dialogue titled “Tobacco and Linkage Sector” at a five-star hotel in Dhaka. At the event, several proposed provisions—such as abolishing smoking zones, banning tobacco industry CSR activities, prohibiting e-cigarettes, introducing separate licensing for tobacco sales, banning mobile vending of tobacco products, and prohibiting single-stick cigarette sales—were described as unreasonable and unjustified.

These claims were entirely baseless, as the draft amendment was prepared by the Ministry of Health in line with WHO FCTC recommendations. It was also claimed that representatives of the sector were not consulted during drafting. However, under the FCTC Article 5.3 Guidelines (Recommendations 3.1 and 3.4), tobacco companies are neither to be treated as partners in public health policymaking nor consulted for opinions.

False claims were also made that the draft required government representatives on company boards—no such provision existed. A so-called anti-tobacco NGO representative was presented but was seen opposing the e-cigarette ban in alignment with IPAB’s position. Representatives of other tobacco-backed organizations were also present.

Although it was claimed that leaders of journalist associations attended, none were actually present. Several BAT officials were observed at the event. Notably, two BAT Bangladesh officials hold senior positions (Director General and Treasurer) within IPAB’s Executive Committee.[3]

Example 2: Press Conferences via the National Small and Cottage Industries Association (NASIB)
In July–August 2022, NASIB branches in several districts organized press conferences[4]. opposing licensing provisions in the proposed amendment, claiming that licensing for tobacco sales was unreasonable. In reality, licensing is a globally recognized public health measure already implemented in countries such as India, the USA, the UK, the UAE, Turkey, China, Canada, Australia, Argentina, and many EU states.

They also opposed bans on point-of-sale tobacco displays, arguing that it would create uncertainty about product availability. However, studies in Bangladesh show widespread tobacco product display near schools and at children’s eye level. Globally, 57 countries—including Nepal, Thailand, Singapore, Saudi Arabia, Australia, England, Ireland, Finland, and Norway—have already banned point-of-sale tobacco displays.[5]

NASIB also claimed that the ban on single-stick sales was inappropriate, despite evidence showing that such sales increase youth access. To date, 109 countries have banned single-stick and small-pack tobacco sales.

Example 3: Campaigns via Business Associations
Tobacco companies promoted their statements through national business bodies such as FBCCI, MCCI, DCCI, FICCI, the Bangladesh Shop Owners Association, the Bangladesh Restaurant Owners Association, and the Bangladesh Printing Industries Association. Officials of BATB and JTI hold positions in many of these organizations..[6]

Strategy 2: Front Groups and Associations

Example 1: Webinars by “Voice of Vapers”
On 2 September 2022, Voice of Vapers Bangladesh organized a webinar titled “Save Vaping, Save Bangladesh”, claiming that banning vaping would increase smoking.[7] There is no evidence to support this claim. Voice of Vapers Bangladesh operates as an official partner of the World Vapers’ Alliance, which has long received funding from BAT.[8] Its activities are largely organized by the Bangladesh Electronic Nicotine Delivery System Traders Association (BENDSTA).

Example 2: Press Conferences and Human Chains by BENDSTA
On 4 July 2022, BENDSTA organized a press conference in Dhaka, claiming that governments worldwide consider vaping an alternative to quitting smoking. In reality, 34 countries—including India, Sri Lanka, Thailand, Malaysia, and Singapore—have banned these products to protect youth.[9] Further claims that countries like the UK encourage vaping are also misleading. The UK recently banned disposable vapes to protect children.[] WHO’s Global Tobacco Report 2021 categorizes vaping products as a “serious health threat.”

Despite this, BENDSTA demanded that their opinions be considered in policymaking, which is prohibited under FCTC Article 5.3. Doctors were also involved in these activities, including one falsely presented as representing the Ministry of Health.

Example 3: PMI-Funded Research, Summits, and Roundtables
Several roundtables and summits opposing the e-cigarette ban were organized with the involvement of organizations funded by Philip Morris International (PMI), including the Foundation for a Smoke-Free World (now Global Action to End Smoking). These events attempted to portray vaping bans as ineffective and misrepresented WHO’s position. WHO has publicly stated that it has an irreconcilable conflict of interest with this foundation and has urged governments and public health institutions to avoid collaboration.

Strategy 3: Use of So-Called International “Experts”

This included letters to the Ministry of Health from PMI-linked international experts urging reconsideration of the e-cigarette ban, submissions by organizations such as the Tholos Foundation, publication of biased research reports, and advocacy by international trade bodies that include major tobacco companies as members.

Strategy 4: Direct Letters to Government Ministries

BATB and JTI sent letters to the Ministry of Finance and the Ministry of Law claiming that the amendment would reduce government revenue. However, National Board of Revenue data show that tobacco tax revenue increased significantly after previous amendments in 2005 and 2013. Similar misleading claims were made in letters to the National Board of Revenue, despite evidence that tobacco-related healthcare costs far exceed tobacco tax revenue.

Strategy 5: Pressure via Non-Health Ministries

The tobacco industry used economic and illicit trade arguments to influence non-health ministries, despite World Bank and WHO data showing that Bangladesh has one of the lowest rates of illicit cigarette trade globally.

Strategy 6: Opinion Pieces by Beneficiary Economists

Industry-aligned economists published misleading articles claiming revenue losses. In fact, tobacco use causes massive healthcare costs and productivity losses, and reduced tobacco consumption benefits both public health and the economy.

Strategy 7: Media Campaigns

Tobacco companies ensured extensive media coverage of third-party events and coordinated publication of anti-amendment narratives. Claims that removing smoking zones would increase second-hand smoke exposure at home are contrary to global evidence. Seventy-four countries have already abolished designated smoking areas, now considered a global best practice.

Smoking and Tobacco Products Use (Control) (Amendment) Ordinance, 2025

What Advocates Stood For

The draft amendment released for public consultation in 2022 included several evidence-based measures strongly supported by public health advocates. Central among these was an expanded definition of tobacco products to explicitly include e-cigarettes, heated tobacco products, and all nicotine-containing products, closing loopholes exploited by the tobacco industry to promote “reduced-harm” narratives, particularly among young people.

The draft also proposed establishing 100% smoke-free public places by removing designated smoking areas. It recommended introducing a comprehensive ban on tobacco advertising, promotion, and sponsorship across traditional and digital media, along with prohibiting point-of-sale displays and banning tobacco industry corporate social responsibility (CSR) activities. Additional measures aimed to reduce tobacco availability and youth access to tobacco, including banning sales near schools and health facilities, prohibiting loose tobacco sales, and introducing retailer licensing through local government. Finally, it proposed increasing pictorial health warnings to 90% of the package surface.

What the Final Ordinance Achieved

The 2025 Ordinance incorporates several of the draft’s most important elements. It significantly strengthens the legal definition of tobacco products by including electronic nicotine delivery systems, heated tobacco products, nicotine pouches, and other nicotine products as declared by the government. All public places and means of public transport, including both mechanized and non-mechanized, are now smoke-free, effectively abolishing designated smoking areas. Maximum fines for violations have been increased from BDT 300 to BDT 2,000.

The Ordinance also delivers a comprehensive ban on tobacco advertising, promotion, and sponsorship, explicitly covering digital media, social media, and streaming platforms, as well as point-of-sale displays. A complete ban on the use, production, import, and marketing of all kinds of electronic nicotine delivery system (ENDS) products—i.e., e-cigarettes, vapes, and heated tobacco products (HTPs)—is also incorporated. Restrictions on tobacco sales within 100 metres of schools, hospitals, and playgrounds have been retained, reinforcing protections for children and adolescents.

What the Tobacco Industry Achieved

Despite these gains, several critical proposals were diluted or excluded. The sale of loose tobacco products, which has long undermined tobacco taxation measures, remains legal. The Ordinance also does not include a ban on mobile and itinerant tobacco vending, thereby leaving the widespread availability and affordability of tobacco products unchecked. A proposed mandatory retailer licensing system was also excluded from the finalized Ordinance.

Pictorial health warnings were increased to 75% of the package surface but fell short of the proposed 90%. Tobacco companies’ corporate social responsibility (CSR) activities remain permissible. Although the Ordinance restricts the use of tobacco branding in CSR activities, it stops short of imposing a complete ban, thereby leaving scope for continued image-building and indirect influence by the industry.

Challenge Ahead

After years of effort, the Smoking and Tobacco Products Use (Control) (Amendment) Ordinance has been approved—marking a milestone in Bangladesh’s tobacco control history. Under constitutional provisions, the Ordinance must be approved by Parliament within 30 days of its first session, or it will lapse.

Therefore, sustained and coordinated engagement with policymakers, administrators, the media, and all stakeholders is essential to ensure that the Ordinance is passed by Parliament without any changes.