Three importers and the Chamber of Small and Medium Enterprises – GRTU filed two judicial protests requesting the courts to order the authorities to release confiscated cigarette packets without health warning pictures that had been legally imported and paid for.
NM Arrigo, Interbrands, Charles Grech & Co. and the GRTU, on behalf of its members, called on the courts to stop the “abusive and illegal” action taken by the health authorities with regard to a stock bought and imported before a legal notice imposed the use of colour pictures on cigarette packets.
The protests, filed against the Prime Minister, the Health Minister, the Finance Minister, the Attorney General and the Director General of Health, pointed out that the legal notice – published in 2009 – required that all cigarette packets placed on the market after April 27 had to have a written and pictorial health warning.
Just two days before the legal notice came into force, the Director General of Health “simply” placed an advert in the press informing retailers they could not sell cigarette packets that did not have the pictorial health warning after June 22.
Before the legal notice came into force, cigarette packets were only required by law to have a written health warning. Since April 27, each packet that was imported or placed on the market was compliant with the new legal notice and included both a written and pictorial health warning, the protests said. However, there was still a “considerable” stock of packets that only had a written health warning because these had been released for sale before the legal notice came into force, the importers argued.
Such cigarettes were mainly “slow moving brands” that were not sold immediately and were available in shops when the law changed, through no fault of their own. However, the health authorities “arbitrarily” decided that selling this stock was “illegal” and that the packets should be removed from the market even though the excise tax was paid.
The authorities also expected that businesses that sold these packets should shoulder the loss by destroying the stock, the judicial protests said.
Cigarette packets without the pictorial warnings that had been placed on the market before the legal notice was issued were being confiscated by the health authorities and sealed in bags.
The authorities were also considering further action against shop owners who still had the old stock of cigarettes, the importers added.
Showing a “collaborative spirit”, the importers offered to put stickers on the packets but the Health Minister refused the proposal. Also, the Finance Minister believed he had the right to retain the tax paid on the confiscated packets, making money off the importers by destroying the packets that had been duly paid, the judicial protests said. This clearly breached their rights as importers, distributors and sellers, who would suffer losses of thousands of euros and the authorities would be held responsible for any damages suffered, they said.
The judicial protests were filed on Thursday, just hours before the GRTU held a press conference explaining its stand.
The Environmental Health Directorate defended its stand, pointing out that research proved that pictorial warnings had a greater impact than simple text. Also, the legal notice was in line with World Health Organisation’s Framework Convention on Tobacco Control, of which Malta was a signatory.
“It is this government’s policy not to publish any legal notice unless adequate consultation is carried out with all stakeholders,” the directorate said. Consultation meetings with stakeholders were held in December 2008 and September 2009 when the GRTU was invited but failed to attend. However, they were requested in writing in September 2009 to give their comments on the proposed legislation, the health authorities said.
The directorate gave ample time to all traders to regulate themselves, issued several press releases and consulted the industry as required by government policy, it said.