FCTC Article 5.3 A Call for Transparency, Not Exclusion

Business Desk:

Debate is intensifying over the interpretation of Article 5.3 of the World Health Organization’s Framework Convention on Tobacco Control (FCTC), with sector insiders warning that misrepresentation of the provision could have serious economic and governance consequences for Bangladesh.

In 2003, WHO adopted the Framework Convention on Tobacco Control (FCTC) at a global conference. Article 5.3 of the FCTC states, “In setting and implementing their public health policies with respect to tobacco control, Parties shall act to protect these policies from commercial and other vested interests of the tobacco industry in accordance with national law”

WHO’s implementation guidelines for Article 5.3 clarify that there is no prohibition on communication with tobacco companies, as long as such interactions are controlled, transparent, and properly documented. Seeking input from stakeholders—including companies, farmers, vendors, wholesalers, and retailers thus does not violate the FCTC.
However, several civil society groups and advocacy organizations have recently argued that the article requires governments to completely disengage from industry stakeholders when amending tobacco control laws.

Policy analysts and economic observers say this is a flawed reading of the text. They point out that the official WHO guidelines accompanying Article 5.3 emphasize transparency in government–industry interactions, not exclusion. While the guidelines call for safeguards against vested interests, they do not prohibit dialogue or consultation.

On February 22, 2022, the European Court of Justice clarified the interpretation of Article 5.3 of the FCTC, stating that it does not oblige member states to entirely exclude the tobacco industry from policymaking processes. The court further emphasized that the implementation guidelines are advisory in nature and serve as recommendations to support member states, rather than being legally binding.

Experts stress that tobacco control is not just about cigarette companies and health campaigners. It affects farmers, retailers, hawkers, and even trade unions. Ignoring these voices risks creating laws that are disconnected from the country’s economic and social realities.

The economic stakes must be considered. Bangladesh’s tobacco industry contributes around 30-35% of the country’s VAT revenue —while providing livelihoods to hundreds of thousands of farmers, factory workers, and retailers. Analysts warn that abrupt amendments without stakeholder consultation could trigger job losses, disrupt supply chains, and shrink vital revenue streams.

Experts emphasize that inclusivity does not mean unchecked influence. Instead, it means structured, transparent consultations where all relevant stakeholders are heard, and where civil society plays an active role in ensuring accountability. Article 5.3 is a call for vigilance, not silence. they further urge the government to engage responsibly, and not to disengage entirely. This framework allows for inclusive policy development, provided such consultations are conducted transparently and in a manner that prioritizes public health. Misrepresenting the article for advocacy gain only undermines the credibility of the tobacco control movement itself.