Recently, anti-tobacco interest groups were angered that Indonesian kretek brand Sampoerna A was allowed to sponsor a gameshow currently showing on local channel TV3.

They charge that this constitutes a blatant violation of last year's cabinet directive that all types of advertising and sponsorship are banned from July this year onwards.

Despite numerous government announcements - promises going as far back as 1992 - that it will be prohibiting all direct and indirect cigarettes ads and sponsorship, indirect promotion of tobacco brand names on television continues until today.

This is mainly because neither television stations nor tobacco companies would be in violation of the law if tobacco companies were found to be sponsoring television programmes.

The current advertising code only spells out a ban on direct tobacco advertisements - meaning the depiction of cigarette packs, or something resembling a cigarette pack or a smoking accessory, or a tobacco brand name that is not representing any other legitimate business, are not allowed on television screens.

The Food Act 1983, under which Malaysia's tobacco controls are spelled out, is equally silent on indirect tobacco ads or brand name sponsorship.

In fact, Japan Tobacco, Philip Morris (previously Godfrey Philips, now known as Altria) and British American Tobacco - all three of which share a total of almost 98 percent of the cigarette market in the country - hold themselves to an advertising code that is far more stringent than the restrictions imposed by Malaysian legislation.

The International Tobacco Products Marketing Standards, signed by the big three, promises no "direct or indirect payment or contribution for the placement of tobacco product" and no advertisement of tobacco brand names in any motion picture, television programme, live performance, or video game.

However no comprehensive tobacco-control legislation have materialised in Malaysia despite last year's cabinet directive that all sponsorships and indirect ads must be banished from television from July 2003 onwards.

Malaysia's reputation

According to Australian-based public health researcher Mary Assunta, tobacco companies have in the past gotten around anti-tobacco policies, with the aid of the Malaysian government.

Because of that, the nation has earned a "reputation of being the world's capital for indirect tobacco advertising."

In her review of previously secret tobacco industry documents, the PhD candidate at the University of Sydney found that not only has the government been historically lax in committing to tobacco-control legislation, but that tobacco companies have also in the past acted not quite above board.

According Assunta, her research has now found that tobacco firms were allowed to get around the stringent no-tobacco standards of international sports organisers, with the help of the government.

Her research, carried out between November 2001 and March 2003, were based on searches of internal documents of tobacco companies issued mainly from 1970 to 2000. Her most recent report was completed on Nov 18.

Malaysiakini first reported on Monday that the tobacco industry used highly placed government contacts to thwart numerous initiatives against cigarette advertising for almost two decades. As a result, legislative initiatives were delayed or watered down.

A December 1993 BAT memo has now revealed that it had advised the government on how it could get around the 1998 Commonwealth Games' smoke-free policy, and still sponsor the event.

This came after the minister of youth and sports had announced in May the same year that cigarette companies would continue to be active in sports. Specifically, the minister also welcomed tobacco companies to sponsor and contribute towards the 1998 Commonwealth Games fund.

The memo, which was directed to the National Sports Council, an agency in the ministry, revealed that rather than contributing directly to the 1998 Commonwealth Games fund, which would automatically violate the smoke-free policy, companies would contribute to the National Sports Council coffers instead.

The memo explained:

"NSC will write to the tobacco companies inviting financial contributions. Effectively the industry will be allowed to 'sponsor' the aims and work of the NSC and the industry will seek limited publicity so that contributions can be managed as a brand operating expense, thus avoiding the need for specific disclosure in annual reports the industry is proposing to contribute RM250 million over a five-year period beginning January 1994."

Commonwealth in the dark

Curiously, this sponsorship pledge far exceeded the actual cost of the Games itself, which is estimated at between RM150 million and RM200 million only, said Assunta.

Furthermore, Assunta's communication with Commonwealth Games Fund official M Lockhart indicated that the foundation was in the dark over the deal.

"If there was any hint of a deal between 'the 1998 Commonwealth Games' and tobacco associated companies, it would have been squashed hard early on," said Lockhart in a 2002 email correspondence.

Another recent example, said Assunta, would be BAT's sponsorship of the local live telecast of the World Cup in 2002.

This was back-dropped against an earlier decision by the Federation Internationale de Football Association (Fifa) that the Cup finals for 2002 and 2006 would exclude tobacco-related sponsors.

"The even greater irony was, the 2002 World Cup commenced on World No Tobacco Day," she said.

But despite Health Ministry complaints, BAT did not technically break any laws. The company even points out that right after the World Cup, it stopped sponsoring telecasts of foreign football, in compliance with its own marketing code.

BAT still sponsors local football via Dunhill, but their contract with the Football Association of Malaysia is due to expire in 2004.

While the current television sponsorship by Sampoerna A may go against a cabinet directive that has no legal teeth, everything looks above board with BAT and the other two big tobacco companies - Philip Morris (Godfrey Philips) and Japan Tobacco.

Advertising revenue

It is not just with sports that the government has encouraged tobacco companies to continue promoting its cigarette brands.

Then Information Minister Mohamed Rahmat had in 1996 called on tobacco companies to use indirect means of advertising to push forth tobacco brand name and trademark, as it was technically legal and government policy had not spelled out otherwise, said Assunta

"While the Health Ministry and consumer groups called for an end to all direct or indirect tobacco advertising, the information minister actively defended the industry and officiated at its functions," she said.

The following year, the same minister announced that it would be difficult to enforce the ban on indirect advertisements in the print and electronic media.

At the same time, Mohamad also admitted that RTM could not do without tobacco money, said Assunta. Cigarette brand name advertisements during that 1990s accounted for a whopping 40 percent of RTM's ad earnings.

Malaysia is so popular with tobacco companies, said Assunta, that the industry presents it as a case study at international meetings, chronicling how the industry managed to side-step government attempts to restrict advertising.

"Sandwiched between Thailand and Singapore, two countries with the most comprehensive tobacco laws in the world, Malaysia has provided an attractive, commercial environment for companies like BAT, Japan Tobacco and Phillip Morris."

Assunta stressed that the Malaysian government cannot be absolved of its role in promoting and participating actively in the tobacco business.

"Its lack of political will to implement strong tobacco control measures, such as a total ban on all forms of direct and indirect advertising, is evident and must be acknowledged.

"In this respect, the difference between Singapore and Malaysia is stark."

Since 1971, Singapore has been actively tightening its prohibitions on all forms of tobacco advertising.

In fact, said Assunta, after the total ban on tobacco advertisements were introduced, the Singapore's minister of culture also stated: "if the advertising on Malaysian television received in Singapore increased, further legislation would be possible, ie warning labels on packets in four languages."

Tobacco farmers

A policy observer, who declined to be named, explained that unlike Malaysia, Singapore does not have the added element of a farming community to "elicit sympathy from the political masters".

Demographically, tobacco farmers are predominantly Malays from Kelantan, Terengganu, Perlis and Kedah, said Assunta.

And under the National Economic Policy, the government has a responsibility to alleviate the poverty of the Malays.

If one looks at the fact that 88.1 per cent of paddy farmers live below poverty line, and couple that with the reality that tobacco farming is promoted as a supplementary income generator, one can appreciate the perception that anti-tobacco initiatives would adversely affect poor Malay farmers, Assunta added.

The argument is compelling, even though in reality the farming industry is small, and the same land could be used for other crops, that are equally viable.

Through Mardi, the Agriculture Ministry has now found replacement crops that can flourish well in tobacco soil - such as cabbage, sweet potato, chilies and roselle. But researchers say that the lack of marketing initiatives for these new crops have resulted in concerns that the new replacements cannot provide the kind of income stability generated from tobacco sale.

Currently, tobacco companies are required buy from local farmers via the National Tobacco Board - guaranteeing an automatic demand for the leaves.

But such artificial protection becomes moot when the Asean Free Trade Agreement takes effect - this protectionist policy will need to be phased out by 2010 at the latest. After that, governments can no longer compel industries to purchase domestically first.

Of course, the real story behind keeping the industry alive, is the government's own financial interests in tobacco farming.

"The Malaysian government is an active investor in and promoter of tobacco," said Assunta.

"It has direct financial interests through ownership of shares in the tobacco industry, protects local tobacco through high import tariffs, and safeguards the future of tobacco through a national tobacco board and benefits from tobacco advertising revenue from its television and radio station."

It is estimated that the government received RM1.28 billion from tobacco taxes in 1997.

Tomorrow: Gunning for a youthful image