Essential Action, along with the City and County of San Francisco, the Asian-Pacific Islander American Health Forum, the San Francisco African American Tobacco Free Project (SFAATFP), and the Black Network In Children’s Emotional Health (BNICEH), in August 2005 filed an amicus brief in the U.S. federal government’s RICO (Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organization Act) case against the tobacco industry. . . .
The brief from Essential Action and our partners argues that because the tobacco industry is globalized, U.S. tobacco control efforts must take into account the international operations of the tobacco industry in order to be effective in the United States. We urge that a number of the remedies proposed by the government therefore apply internationally, and to the foreign affiliates of the defendants with international operations, Philip Morris/Altria and BAT. We also recommend some remedies not proposed by the government, and argue that they too should apply internationally and to the foreign subsidiaries.
Among our recommendations:
* Philip Morris and BAT should be required to publicly disclose and post on the Internet all company documents related to health and science issues, and to marketing, including documents generated outside of the United States and related to markets outside of the United States.
* Philip Morris and BAT should be required to publicly disclose support for all front organizations that have significant impacts in the United States, wherever they are based (example: the ETS Consultancy).
* Philip Morris and BAT should be prohibited from representing that low-tar and/or lower-nicotine cigarettes are less hazardous, anywhere in the world.
* All brand-name sponsorships or product placement that have significant effects in the United States (e.g., sponsorship of Formula One racing, or Philip Morris International product placements with Hollywood) should be prohibited.
Our amicus brief
Motion for leave to file amicus brief
The industry’s motion arguing that our brief should be rejected
Our reply to the industry’s motion
The judge’s order that our brief, and others amicus filings, will be accepted for consideration