PETALING JAYA: The decision by three NGOs to sue health minister Dr Zaliha Mustafa over the removal of nicotine from the Poisons Act is a wake-up call for the government to reassess its priorities in tobacco control, says a think tank.
Galen Centre for Health and Social Policy said the lawsuit is not surprising, given the numerous appeals, consultations and frustrations expressed by public health experts and children’s advocates.
“(It is) an act of last resort to get the government to take immediate measures to prevent harm, especially with increasing reports of high nicotine and marijuana-laced vape use among young people and even children,” Galen CEO Azrul Khalib said in a statement.
Earlier today, it was reported that three NGOs, namely the Malaysian Council for Tobacco Control, the Malaysian Green Lung Association and Voice of the Children filed a judicial review leave application at the High Court in Kuala Lumpur on Friday last week.
The two respondents named in the lawsuit are the health minister and the Malaysian government.
In the lawsuit, the three applicants are seeking a court order to nullify Zaliha’s decision on March 31 to amend the Poisons Act.
On April 1, the health ministry published a gazette notice, exempting nicotine liquids and gels used in e-cigarettes and vape products from poison control.
The three applicants contended that the minister failed to properly consider and engage with the Poisons Board, which unanimously voted against the nicotine exemption.
With this judicial review, Azrul said the government now faces two choices – to defend its decision or to reverse the Order pending the passage of the 2023 Control of Smoking Product for Public Health Bill in Parliament.
“Maintaining the current status could place the government in an impossible position – defending nicotine vape and e-cigarettes despite the health ministry’s own warning that these products constitute a public health threat,” he said.
Azrul also said the failure to take decisive action could result in Malaysia being on the wrong side of history, similar to a 1994 US case where seven American tobacco companies denied knowing the addictive nature of cigarettes and nicotine.
