By Joseph Magero, chairman of the Campaign for Safer Alternatives
NAIROBI, Kenya, June 23 – The Tobacco Bill is back on the agenda for Kenya’s lawmakers. And once again, everyday consumers will barely be allowed to have their say.
Like the Finance Bill, which critics argue is introducing far-reaching changes without adequate public scrutiny, the Tobacco Control (Amendment) Bill could reshape the lives of millions of Kenyans with minimal consultation.
Just one day in Nairobi has been set aside to hear views from across our 56-million-strong nation on legislation that carries hefty fines, severe penalties and even prison sentences.
So, who will get to speak for the 2.3 million smokers who risk losing one of their best opportunities to quit deadly cigarettes?
Smoking remains one of the country’s leading preventable causes of death, claiming nearly 9,000 Kenyan lives every year. Yet mounting international evidence shows that smokeless nicotine alternatives such as vapes and nicotine pouches offer many smokers their best chance of escaping combustible tobacco.
Instead of embracing that opportunity, the proposed Bill would impose sweeping new restrictions on these products, including what amounts to a de facto ban on flavours.
We are told this is “not a ban”. But when you remove the flavours that adult smokers actually use to quit, you effectively remove much of the product’s appeal and usefulness.
What makes the proposed restrictions particularly troubling is that they assume consumers will simply accept whatever choices government leaves available to them.
But real life rarely works that way.
For many smokers, flavours help create distance from the taste and experience of cigarettes. Remove those options and some will return to smoking, while others will turn to illicit markets.
That should concern every policymaker. Illicit trade places products beyond regulatory oversight where age restrictions become harder to enforce, product standards disappear and tax revenues are lost. Meanwhile, legal businesses that comply with regulations and age-verification requirements are pushed out of the market.
Around the world, governments are increasingly recognising that not all nicotine products carry the same risks. Cigarettes kill because tobacco is burned and inhaled. Smokeless alternatives avoid that combustion process and therefore expose users to far fewer harmful chemicals.
Now Kenya must decide whether our new regulations should encourage smokers to move away from cigarettes or make that transition more difficult.
A sensible approach would focus on preventing underage access, enforcing product standards and targeting irresponsible marketing, while preserving options that help adults quit smoking, such as flavours in safer alternatives.
Most importantly, it would listen to consumers. Millions of Kenyans will be affected by this legislation, yet they have been given remarkably little opportunity to contribute to the debate.
Kenya has an opportunity to build a tobacco-control strategy that reduces smoking while protecting young people. Or it can adopt measures that make alternatives less attractive while leaving cigarettes firmly in place.
With the lives of so many at stake, lawmakers should ask themselves this question: will this Bill help more smokers quit, or make it harder for them to do so?
