fctc article 5.3 guidelines best practice: the role of … practicecsc...advertising, promotion, and...

March 2015 FCTC Article 5.3 Guidelines Best Practice: The Philippines

FCTC Article 5.3 Guidelines Best Practice:The Role of the Public Service Commission

Southeast Asia Tobacco Control AllianceMarch 2015

The Southeast Asia Tobacco Control Alliance (SEATCA) is a multi-sectoral allianceestablished to support ASEAN countries in developing and implementing effective tobaccocontrol policies. It responds to the serious need to fast-track tobacco control policies inSoutheast Asia. Working to identify tobacco control priorities in the region andcoordinating efforts on these priorities, SEATCA promotes knowledge-sharing amongcountries for effective, evidence-based tobacco control measures and regionalcooperation among its advocacy partners.

SEATCA is acknowledged by governments and academic institutions for its advancement of tobacco controlmovements in Southeast Asia. In 2004, the WHO Western Pacific Regional Office (WPRO) presented theWorld No Tobacco Day Award to SEATCA. WHO-WPRO has since engaged SEATCA to provide technicalassistance directly to government officials across the region.

Copyright © SEATCA

All rights reserved. This publication may be freely reproduced or transmitted for non-commercial purposesonly. Commercial use or transmission in any form or by any means, electronic or including photocopy,recording or any other information storage and retrieval system, requires prior permission in writing fromthe publisher.

The Role of Public Servicein Implementing a Global Tobacco Treaty

WHO FCTC: Global Tobacco Treaty

General Treaty Obligation: Article 5.3

Coverage: Public Health Policies withrespect to Tobacco Control

FCTC Article 5.3 Guidelines

Transparency Measures Recommended

Translating FCTC Article 5.3 into Reality

Specific Rules for Public Officials

Case Study: Philippine Civil ServiceCommissionBox 1. JMC in a NutshellBox 2. JMC in ActionBox 3. Raising Awareness

Winds of Change

Countering Tobacco IndustryInterference

Best Practices Checklist

Establish a forumAdopt a code of conductExclude tobacco industry in meetings

The First Step

Establish a core group and develop a planBox 4. Government Agencies Targetedby the Tobacco Industry

The Next Step

The Final Step

Continue to overcome challengesBuild capacityBuid alliancesTake immediate actionPrepare to overcome challenges

How the Philippines is ImplementingArticle 5.3

Recommendation 1

Recommendations 2 to 4

Recommendation 5

Annexes

Annex ASample Comprehensive National Policy

Annex BSample Sector Specific No-CSR Policy forEducation Ministry

Annex CSample Sector Specific Policy for Tax Authorities

Annex DSample Policy/Reminder for Diplomatic Missions

Annex ESample Warning Letter to Trade Ministry

Annex F2014 FCTC COP6 Decision on Art 5.3Implementation

References

1-2

3-10

11

12-26

27

CONTENTS

FCTC Article 5.3 Guidelines Best Practice: The Philippines March 2015

WHO FCTC:Global Tobacco Treaty

The World Health Organization (WHO)Framework Convention on Tobacco Control(FCTC) is the first treaty developed under theauspices of the WHO which came into forcein February 2005 and has been ratified by 180Parties (out of 196 eligible Parties),representing 89% of the world’s population. Itis a treaty that aims to address the devastatinghealth, social, economic, and environmentalconsequences of tobacco consumption andexposure to tobacco smoke.

General Treaty Obligation:Article 5.3The FCTC embodies numerous evidence-based measures to reduce smoking andexposure to tobacco smoke, promotealternative livelihood, and regulate the tobaccoindustry in various aspects of operation.Article 5.3 of the FCTC is an overarchingobligation that allows the government to fulfillthe objectives of the treaty by obligating Partiesto protect their public health policies from thecommercial and other vested interests of thetobacco industry.

Coverage: Public Health Policieswith respect to Tobacco ControlThe purpose of Article 5.3 is to protect publichealth policies with respect to tobacco control.

This obligation applies to officials who have rolesto play in developing or implementing policies,programs, and strategies corresponding toFCTC provisions. The sectors involved include,among others:

1. Agriculture (Art. 17: Provision of supportfor economically viable alternative activities;Art. 18: Protection of the environment andthe health of persons)

2. Budget (Art. 26: Financial resources)3. Culture and Arts (Art. 13: Tobacco

advertising, promotion, and sponsorship)4. Customs (Art. 15: Illicit trade in tobacco

products)5. Development/ Sustainable

Development (Art. 17: Provision ofsupport for economically viable alternativeactivities)

6. Education (Art. 12: Education,communication, training, and publicawareness)

7. Environmental (Art. 8: Protection fromexposure to tobacco smoke; Art. 18:Protection of the environment and thehealth of persons)

8. Foreign Affairs or InternationalCooperation (Art. 2: Relationshipbetween this Convention and otheragreements and legal instruments; Art. 20:Research, surveillance and exchange ofinformation; Art. 21: Reporting andexchange of information; Art. 22:Cooperation in the scientific, technical, andlegal fields and provision of relatedexpertise )

9. Food and Drug/ Regulatory Agenciesof Health (Art. 9: Regulation of thecontents of tobacco products; Art. 10:Regulation of tobacco product disclosures;Art. 11: Packaging and labeling of tobaccoproducts)

The Role of Public ServiceIn Implementing a Global Tobacco Treaty


10. Justice (Art. 19: Liability)11. Labor (Art. 17: Provision of support for

economically viable alternative activities;Art. 18: Protection of the environment andthe health of persons)

12. Local Government (Art. 16: Sales to andby minors)

13. Marginalized Sectors (women, children,indigenous peoples, urban poor, etc.) (allsubstantive provisions)

14. Public Information (Art. 12: Education,communication, training, and publicawareness)

15. Public Service (Art. 5: Generalobligations [including multisectoralcollaboration and protection againsttobacco industry interference])

16. Social Welfare (Art. 13: Tobaccoadvertising, promotion, and sponsorship)

17. Sports (Art. 13: Tobacco advertising,promotion, and sponsorship)

18. Tax or revenue (Art. 6: Price and taxmeasures to reduce the demand fortobacco)

19. Trade (e.g., Art. 9: Regulation of thecontents of tobacco products; Art. 10:Regulation of tobacco productdisclosures; Art. 17: Provision of supportfor economically viable alternativeactivities)

20. Transportation (Art. 8: Protection fromexposure to tobacco smoke)

FCTC Article 5.3 GuidelinesThe Guidelines for the Implementation of Art5.3 (Guidelines) was adopted throughconsensus by treaty parties in 2008 to assistgovernments in implementing Art 5.3. Theguidelines allow policymakers andimplementers to ensure that the efforts toprotect tobacco control policies from thetobacco industry are comprehensive andeffective. It recommends that governmentsestablish measures to:

1. Raise awareness about the harmful natureof tobacco products and tobacco industryinterference

2. Limit interaction with the tobaccoindustry and ensure the transparency ofinteractions that occur

3. Reject partnerships and non-binding ornon-enforceable agreements with thetobacco industry

4. Avoid conflicts of interest for governmentofficials and employees

5. Deformalize activities described as“socially responsible” by the tobaccoindustry

6. Require that information provided by thetobacco industry be transparent andaccurate

7. Do not give preferential treatment to thetobacco industry

8. Treat state-owned tobacco industry in thesame way as any other tobacco industry

Transparency MeasuresRecommendedThe Guidelines provided specific measures topromote transparency in reducing conflict ofinterest and in dealing with the tobaccoindustry:

Disclosure and management of conflict ofinterest for officials, employees,consultants, and contractors involved insetting and implementing public healthpolicies with respect to tobacco control

Transparent interaction with the tobaccoindustry through public hearings, publicnotices of interactions, and disclosure ofrecords

Disclosure of tobacco industry activities Disclosure or registration of tobacco

2


Specific Rules for Public OfficialsMany of the items in the Guidelines refer to the conduct of public officials, specifically highlighting theneed to develop clear policies that cover all those working in government offices, including contractorsand applicants, and the measures that need to be taken to avoid conflicts of interests, such as prohibitingthe following:

1. Having partnerships, non-binding or non-enforceable agreements with the tobacco industry2. Accepting or endorsing policy drafts or other offer of assistance from the tobacco industry3. Accepting or endorsing instruments drafted by the tobacco industry that is offered as a substitute

for legally enforceable tobacco control measures4. Representing the tobacco industry in bodies or entities involved in developing or implementing

policies in relation to tobacco control5. Receiving contributions, gifts, or donations from the tobacco industry6. Participating in “socially responsible” activities of the tobacco industry7. Granting privileges, incentives, or benefits to the tobacco industry

Case StudyThe following case study shows in detail howone Southeast Asian government’s applicationof such recommendations has led to bestpractices in Art 5.3 implementation despitethe challenges faced.

The Philippines: Civil ServiceCommissioni

After representatives from the Department ofHealth (DOH), Civil Service Commission(CSC), and the civil society members learnedabout Art 5.3 and its Guidelines from aSEATCA meeting in 2009, they continued tomeet regularly to monitor tobacco industryinterference and decide on policy reforms thatcould prevent such interference. After monthsof collective deliberation and severalconsultations with other government agencies,the DOH and the CSC jointly issued the JointMemorandum Circular No. 1 of 2010(JMC). This policy provides a code of conduct

1 Equivalent of Public Service Commission in other countries, the Philippine Civil Service Commission is an independent Constitutional body incharge of the working conditions and wellbeing of all public servants in the country.

for all government officials in relation to the tobaccoindustry, which, consistent with Art. 5.3 Guidelines,is broadly defined in the policy to include all thosethat represent the tobacco industry. Civil ServiceCommission has jurisdiction to hear complaintsrelating to the violation of the JMC.

Box 1. JMC in a NutshellConsistent with the Anti-Graft and CorruptPractices Act and the FCTC:

1. All public officials shall: Not interact with the tobacco

industry (TI) unless strictly necessaryfor its regulation;

Make all “necessary” interactionspublic and transparent;

Not receive any form of direct orindirect contribution from TI; and

Disclose interests in the TI.2. Violations of JMC are subject of

administrative proceedings.3. Heads of agencies must include

implementation of the JMC in theirannual agency reports.

Translating FCTC Article 5.3into Reality


Success StoriesThe CSC’s efforts to implement theJMC have resulted in interventionsthat have been significant in ensuringthe protection of tobacco controlmeasures. For instance, in a localgovernment unit cal led Albay,tobacco control advocates, with theassistance of a CSC lawyer, warnedagainst potential violation of the JMCto prevent the tobacco industry frominterfering during a hearing onsmoke-free legislation. The tobaccocompanies were asked to submit anypositions in advance and in writingto ensure transparency and to avoidunnecessary interactions with localgovernment officials. This effectivelyreduced the challenges the advocatesfaced in getting a 100% Smoke-FreeOrdinance adopted.

Box 2. JMC in Actiona. The Department of Education adopted a policy

to prohibit TI contributions (so called CSR ofTI) in public schools and warned thosereported to have received TI CSR indirectly.

b. The Department of Health introduced a morestringent version of the JMC that applies to allagencies and personnel in the agency.

c. When a multinational tobacco companyapproached the Bureau of Customs to be a“partner” in curbing illicit trade, thegovernment agency sought advice from theCSC and was informed that it would violate theJMC if it pursues this partnership.

d. The Department of Labor and Employment,the Department of Science and Technology, theDepartment of Foreign Affairs, the Bureau ofInternal Revenue, and the Metro ManilaDevelopment Authority have issued theirrespective regulations compliant with the JMC.

Box 3. Raising AwarenessConsultations with governmentagencies regarding Art. 5.3 haveencouraged some agencies toinitiate their own Art. 5.3-compliant policy. For instance, inJanuary 2010, the LandTransportation and FranchisingRegulatory Board (LTFRB) hasrequired al l PUVs and landtransportation terminals to be100% smoke-free. PUV drivers andoperators are responsible forposting “No Smoking” signs in theirvehicles, and drivers areresponsible for warning theirpassengers and co-workers against smoking inside PUVs.

In accordance with WHO Art. 5.3, the LTFRB “shall endeavor to partner with government agencies,civil society organizations, and private sector, except, those representing tobacco interests.”

4


THEN : In early 2009, Philip Morrisapproached the Philippines’ Bureau ofCustoms to sign a Memorandum ofAgreement with the company regardingcounterfeit cigarettes. At that time,negotiations were ongoing for the Protocolon Illicit Trade of Tobacco Products, wheregovernments had been asked to sendrepresentatives from the customs and lawenforcement offices. Around this time, PhilipMorris also offered their security markingsystem for possible adoption by the Philippinegovernment.

NOW: In 2012, the Bureau of Customsrejected the renewal of partnership with PhilipMorris, citing that Art 5.3 and the JMCprohibit the agency from doing so.

THEN: In 2009, the Philippines’ Bureau ofInternal Revenue (BIR) awarded a Billionaire’sClub Award to Philip Morris for being one ofthe highest taxpayers. While other businesseshave received the award, Philip Morris’ awardwas widely publicized. This created aperception of endorsement from thegovernment.

NOW: Based on the JMC, the BIR adoptedRevenue Regulation (RR) 28-2014, whichreiterates and spells out the rules in the JMC,and added that any violation of the RR shallbe deemed conduct prejudicial to the bestinterest of the service and shall constitute agrave offense.

Winds of Change

Countering Tobacco Industry InterferenceBelow are some of the tobacco industry’s common tactics that the Philippines managed to addresswith the help of the JMC, a policy that adopts Article 5.3 recommendations.

The tobacco industry does not rest, neither should we.The implementation of the JMC is not without challenges. In May 2012, the Philippines’ Department ofLabor and Employment (DOLE) also issued a memorandum to implement CSC-DOH Joint MemorandumCircular 2010-01. However, four months later, Philip Morris (PMFTC) undermined the policy by meetingwith DOLE officials in a tobacco-producing region and organizing an industry-led tripartite committeeto deal with child labor in tobacco. The Committee includes PMFTC, farmer representatives, and thegovernment. The authorities are currently looking into this matter in line with the JMC.

5


Best Practices Checklist

For more details on this checklist and other tools to encourage government agencies to adoptpolicies that protect against tobacco industry interference, please check out SEATCA’s Toolkitfor Policy Makers and Advocates: Preventing Tobacco Industry Interference availableat www.industryinterference.seatca.org

ESTABLISH A FORUM

In early 2009, the Philippines set up a multi-sectoral Article5.3 committee that includes the Department of Health, theCivil Service Commission, other government agencies, andNGOs.

ADOPT A CODE OF CONDUCT

In 2010, the Philippines adopted a policy to “Protect theBureaucracy from Tobacco Industry Interference” whichincludes revisions to the Code of Conduct, a monitoring/reporting process, and administrative sanctions.

EXCLUDE TOBACCO INDUSTRY IN MEETINGS

In international examples, the Indian government severedties with a tobacco conference that included tobacco industryrepresentatives. At the International Negotiating Body sessionsfor the Illicit Trade Protocol, representatives of over a hundredgovernments agreed to eject the tobacco industry from thepublic gallery.

6

http://www.industryinterference.seatca.org


The First Step

Establish a core group and develop a plan.In the Philippines, members of the Core Group on Art 5.3 include high-level officials in theDepartment of Health, Civil Service Commission, and several NGOs. Other potential partnersinclude the Ombudsman and anti-corruption agencies.

In July 2009, an Art 5.3 Committee was formally set up under the Department of Health todevelop implementation strategies to fulfill the obligations under Art 5.3 as elaborated by theGuidelines.

The Committee is composed of DOH directors and high-level policymakers, high-levelrepresentatives from the Civil Service Commission, Office of the President, as well as civil societyand NGO representatives. The body meets regularly and has created a working group for Inter-agency Linkages, Policy Development, and Communications.

The Inter-agency Linkages working group coordinates the meetings with key government agenciesto ensure that Art 5.3 is implemented in these agencies. The Policy Development working groupfocuses on developing strategies and policies required to promote a tobacco industry-resistantculture. The Communications group develops tools, response mechanisms, and IEC materials toraise awareness about tobacco industry interference. It has produced fact sheets, posters, andvideos relating to Art 5.3. It also developed letter templates and press materials.

In June 2010, the DOH and CSC issued Joint Memorandum Circular 2010-01, prohibiting governmentworkers from interacting with any tobacco corporation or company, except “when strictly necessaryfor the latter’s effective regulation, supervision, or control.”

Box 4. Government Agencies Targeted by the Tobacco IndustryGlobal studies show a pattern on the type of government bodies that the tobacco industry“targets” or partners with because of their existing or potential role in tobacco controlmeasures:

7

o Ministries or Departments of- Agriculture- Budget- Culture- Customs- Education- Environment- Finance- Foreign Affairs- Health

- Internal Revenue- Justice- Labor and Employment- Social Welfare- Tobacco (Board)- Trade and Industry- Transportation and Communication

o Congress or National Assemblieso Local government units (LGUs)


Lack ofunderstanding of thepast and presentinterference by thetobacco industry,including industrystrategies and tactics

The tobaccoindustry interactsfreely with thegovernment

The tobacco industrypartners with andprovides policy draftsto government

The tobaccoindustry createsconflicts of interestfor governmentofficials

The tobaccoindustry is nottransparent

The tobaccoindustry does so-called CSR activitiesto divert attentionfrom harmful effectsof tobacco

The governmentgives exemptions orbenefits to thetobacco industry

Existence of statemonopolies

Raise awareness about theaddictive and harmful natureof tobacco products andabout tobacco industryinterference with Parties’tobacco control policies

Avoid interactions unlessstrictly necessary

Do not partner with oradopt policy drafts from thetobacco industry

Do not acceptcontributions, gifts, orinvitations from the tobaccoindustry

Require the tobaccoindustry to be transparentand accountable

Denormalize so-called CSRactivities of the tobaccoindustry

Do not give privileges orbenefits to the tobaccoindustry

Treat state monopolies thesame way

Programs and surveillancesystems to raise awarenessabout tobacco industryinterference, andidentification of tobaccoindustry players

Code of Conduct and similarpersonnel policies,corresponding state policies

Same as above

Same as above

Laws or rules regulating thetobacco industry (ontransparency, information,privileges, and investment)

Policies/programs forsurveillance and enforcementof tobacco advertising andsponsorship bans

Laws prohibiting (orremoving) benefits to thetobacco industry

Additional provision in theabove-cited policies toensure that such policiesapply equally to statemonopolies

Awareness-raising activities,including media advocacy

Direct action utilizingexisting laws governing publicofficials

Same as above

Same as above

Direct action based onexisting laws regulating thetobacco industry;awareness-raising activities,including media exposure

Ban TI-CSR activities;awareness-raising campaigns,including media exposure

Review of government policy,laws, and contracts providingsuch benefits

Encourage government towithdraw its investment fromthe tobacco business

CHALLENGES RECOMMENDATIONS POLICIES / PROGRAMS IMMEDIATE ACTIONFACED UNDER THE ART 5.3 THAT MUST BE

GUIDELINES TO ADDRESS DEVELOPED ORTHE CHALLENGES ADOPTED

8

The Next Step


The Final Step

Continue to overcome challenges.Adopting policies and programs is a good start but the real challenge is in implementing andsustaining these initiatives.

Build capacity.In 2010, the DOH providedinitial support for the CSC toconduct trainings among CSCofficers to implement the JMC.The CSC continues to conducttrainings and aims toincorporate JMCimplementation in existingprograms and constantlydevelops tools. The legaldepartment of the CSCsignificantly contributes to thetechnical aspects of the training.Professionals in civil societycontribute to these efforts aswell.

Build alliances.The CSC continues to reach outto partners by conducting inter-agency Article 5.3 meetings on aquarterly basis. CSC personneland lawyers also serve asresource persons in capacity-building activities of LGUs,government agencies, and otherentit ies interested inimplementing the JMC.Takeimmediate action.

9


Take Immediate Action.In August 2014, an online news agencyreported that the NTA was liable forunnecessary interaction with Mighty Corp., alocal tobacco company. The National TobaccoAdministrator (NTA) Edgardo Zaragoza posedtogether with a tobacco company’s presidentin a synchronized tree-planting activity. Thetobacco company website reports: “NTA laudsMighty Corp. on its contribution in the tobaccoindustry.”

In response to this news item, the CSCwrote a letter to the NTA warning it thatany activities undertaken jointly with MightyCorporation is a form of unnecessaryinteraction and violates the JMC.

As a response to publicly available reports thatimply a possible violation of the JMC, the CSChad sent similar reminder/warning letters toa few local government units and governmentoffices, such as the Department of Trade andIndustry.

Prepare to overcome challenges.The JMC has not eliminated TI interferencebut has been an effective tool to manage it. Alaw passed in 2003 created a mechanism forthe tobacco industry to interfere. Anassociation of tobacco companies, thePhilippine Tobacco Institute (PTI), sits as amember of the Interagency Committee thatis tasked to implement the Tobacco RegulationAct. While legislative bodies are working tochange this law, the JMC serves as the tobaccocontrol advocates’ strongest weapon tocounter tobacco industry’s interference in thiscommittee.

The tobacco industry, including thoseprotecting its interests, continues toundermine the JMC at every opportunity andseeks to have the Art 5.3-based policyrevoked. The CSC continues to stand firm inorder to uphold its mandate to promoteintegrity in public service.

10


RECOMMENDATION 1

Raise awareness about the harmful nature of tobacco products andabout tobacco industry interference in tobacco control policies.In 2010, the DOH issued DOH Memo 26 where the DOH is required to state the following inall its correspondence, contracts, and issuances: “The Department of Health does not deal withthe tobacco industry or those representing its interests.” In addition, all DOH personnel arerequired to publicly denounce any tobacco industry donation or perception of partnership.

Under this policy, the Department of Health is also required to keep a public record of personsand entities identified as part of the tobacco industry.

The DOH, CSC, and NGOs have conducted workshops all over the country to raise awarenessabout Art 5.3, tobacco industry interference, and the JMC. The CSC has also developed monitoringand reporting procedures to ensure that the policy is effectively implemented.

RECOMMENDATIONS 2 to 4

Establish measures to limit interaction.Reject partnerships and agreements.Avoid conflicts of interest for government officials and employees.In 2010, the DOH and the CSC issued Joint Memorandum Circular 2010-01 to protect thebureaucracy from tobacco industry interference. (See full version in Annex and summary onpage 3.)

Many other government agencies and local governments adopted a complementary policy tosupport and ensure JMC implementation.

RECOMMENDATION 5

Denormalize and regulate tobacco industry activities defined as“socially acceptable.”In 2010, the Health Secretary disseminated warning letters to the recipients of tobacco companydonations, highlighting possible violation of advertising laws and the obligation to protect publichealth from the vested interests of the tobacco industry.

In 2013, the Department of Education investigated a report that a public school received fundingfor an education program through an NGO that received tobacco industry funds; the officialinvolved was given due warning.

In 2014, the CSC wrote a letter to the NTA warning that its activities with Mighty Corporationis a form of unnecessary interaction and violates the JMC.

How the Philippines is ImplementingArticle 5.3

The JMC addresses all civilservants starting with theheads of governmentagencies.

The legal bases for thepolicy include existinglaws and policies on Codeof Conduct and Anti-Graft/ Corruption laws as wellas the FCTC.

Annex A Annex A

Sample Comprehensive National Policy:Civil Service Commission-Department of Health Joint Memorandum Circular No. 2010-01

The definition oftobacco industry andtobacco industryinterference followvery closely thedefinition found in Art.5.3 Guidelines.

CSC-DOH JMC No. 2010-01 (cont.)

The policy lists downthe followingprohibitions: (i)unnecessaryinteraction with thetobacco industry; (ii)preferential treatmentto the tobaccoindustry; and (iii)accepting gifts,donations, andsponsorships.

The head of each agencyis then given a specificrole to raise awarenessabout this policy andadopt the same in itsCode of Conduct Rules.

Financial interest in thetobacco industry

Analogous favors (e.g.,to family members)

Conflict of interest withthe tobacco industry

Engaging in anoccupational activitywithin the tobaccoindustry

CSC DOH JMC No. 2010-01 (cont.)

Any violation of this policyshall be a ground foradministrative disciplinaryaction.

The JMC urges agenciesto disseminate tobaccoindustry interferenceconcerns and requiresthe submission ofinformation that willassist in enforcing thepolicy, such as reportingon tobacco industrytactics and making suchinformation publiclyaccessible.Agencies are alsorequired to includecompliance reports in itsannual report to theCSC.

The DOH committed toprovide seed funding andtechnical assistance toCSC in the policyimplementation.

Agencies are alsorequired to encourageCSO participation inimplementing this policy.CSOs must not havetobacco industryaffiliation.


Because some agencieswould likely beexposed to tobaccoindustry interactions(e.g., trade), the ruleson behavior, in case of"necessary"interactions with thetobacco industry, arelisted here.

The Annex of thispolicy provides atemplate for adoptingthis policy as part oftheir Code ofConduct. In practice,the agenciesincorporate theprovisions in thistemplate into theirown policy issuances.


To denormalize the tobaccoindustry’s so-called CSR activities,public officials are required toavoid the perception of partnershipor cooperation with the tobaccoindustry. Public officials arerequired to publicly correct anyperception of partnership that mayhave been created.

Also listed are more specificdetails on what constitutesfinancial interest and conflict ofinterest, and a more expansivedefinition of gifts andcontributions.


In its objectives, the Orderfocuses on an apparentconcern: the need to avoidall forms of partnershipwith the tobacco industry.This stems from the factthat the leading tobaccocompanies have investedaggressively in theeducation sector and haveprojected themselves aspartners of schools.

The Department ofEducation (DepEd) Orderprovides explicitly thatschool heads are covered.

Annex B

Sample Sector Specific No-CSR Policy for Education Ministry:Department of Education Order No. 6, s. 2012

The policy issuance by theDepartment of Educationprovides specific measuresto gather and disseminateinformation on tobaccoindustry interference.These provisions are alsofound in the JMC but areparticularly useful in thecontext of the publicschool system.

• School officials arerequired to report anyform of so-called CSRactivity of the tobaccoindustry.

• School officials are alsorequired to report anyform of informationthat would facilitateenforcement againsttobacco industryinterference.

• Information includesoffer of donation madeby the tobaccoindustry or anypreferential treatmentgiven to it.

• Information reportedshall be made publiclyaccessible.

DEPED Order No. 6, s. 2012 (cont.)

Annex C

In acordance with theJMC’s provision requiringall government agencies toadopt the provisions in itsAnnex as part of theirCodes of Conduct, the BIRRMO explicitly states thatthe rules laid down underthe JMC in its Annex willform part of the RevisedCode of Conduct ofRevenue Officials andEmployees, specifically thechapter on Prohibitionsagainst Conflict of Interestand Partiality as well asResponsibility to thePublic.

The RevenueMemorandum Order ofthe Bureau of InternalRevenue (BIR RMO)directed its order to all itsrevenue officials andemployees.

It adopted essentially allthe provisions found inthe JMC and explainedhow this should beintegrated in the existingcode of conduct andpolicies of the bureau.

Sample Sector Specific Policy for Tax Authorities:Bureau of Internal Revenue RMO No. 28-2014

Revenue officials areprohibited fromreceiving gifts andcontributions includingpolicy drafts and legaladvice. Contributionsmade to familymembers and otherentities on the official’sbehalf are specificallymentioned. This is thesame provision found inthe Annex of the JMCand reflects therecommendations inArt. 5.3 guidelines.

The RMO specified thetype of offense thatapplies in case ofviolations of the order.In this case, the BIRRMO specified thatviolating any of the ruleswill constitute a GraveOffense and will beconsidered “ConductPrejudicial to the BestInterest of the Service.”And that any chargesmade under this orderwill not prevent the filingof civil and criminal casesthat may apply.

BIR RMO No. 28-2014 (cont.)

The Department ofForeign AffairsMemorandum reachesout to all foreignservice posts includingregional consularoffices to remindthem of the generalprohibitions of theJMC and code ofconduct that shouldbe followed in caseinteractions arestrictly necessary forregulation.

Annex D

The COP6 Decision on Art 5.3 Implementation which wasadopted in October 2014 specifically urged Parties to “raiseawareness and adopt measures to implement Art. 5.3 amongall parts of government including diplomatic missions.”Diplomatic missions have been targeted by tobaccocompanies to promote export or sale of tobacco in foreigncountries as well as to influence negotiations relating to theFCTC.

Annex D

Sample Policy/Reminder for Diplomatic Missions:Department of Foreign Affairs Memorandum re: CSC-DOH JMC No. 2010-01 (24 May 2014)

Source: http://www.who.int/fctc/cop/sessions/COP6_report_FINAL_04122014.pdf

http://www.who.int/fctc/cop/sessions/COP6_report_FINAL_04122014.pdf

JMC and CSC inActionThis is a letter sentout by the CSC as aresponse to newsreports stating thatthe “Philippines isacting in behalf ofPhilip Morris” in theWTO case whichcreates a perceptionof partnershipbetween tradeofficials/agency andthe tobacco industry.The officialconcerned wasnotified by thegovernment’s humanresource department(CSC) of such aperception andreminded of the JMCprovisions that couldapply in order toprovide guidancethereto.

Annex EAnnex DAnnex E

Sample Warning Letter to Trade Ministry:Letter from the Civil Service Commission to the Department of Trade and Industry

re: CSC-DOH JMC No. 2010-01

Annex FAnnex EAnnex DAnnex F

2014 FCTC COP6 Decision on Art 5.3 ImplementationFCTC Conference of the Parties Decision, Sixth Session, 18 October 2014, FCTC/COP6(14)

FCTC/COP6(14) (cont.)

ReferencesBureau of Internal Revenue. Revenue Memorandum Order No. 28-2014. Amendment to the

Civil Service Commission - Department of Health Joint Memorandum Circular No. 2010-01.

Civil Service Commission (26 February 2015). Letter to the Department of Trade and Industry

Department of Education Order No. 6, s. 2012. Guidelines on the Adoption and Implementation

Department of Foreign Affairs (24 May 2013). Memorandum on CSC-DOH Joint Memorandum

Southeast Asia Tobacco Control Alliance (2012). Toolkit for Policy Makers and Advocates:

WHO Framework Convention on Tobacco Control (2014). Conference of the Parties to the

WHO Framework Convention on Tobacco Control (2008). Conference of the Parties to the

Revised Code of Conduct for Revenue Officials and Employees as implemented by RevenueMemorandum Order (RMO) No. 53-2010 by prescribing the policies and guidelines on theprotection of the Bureau of Internal Revenue (BIR) against tobacco industry interferencepursuant to the Joint Memorandum Circular No. 2010-01 of the Civil Service Commissionand Department of Health. Retrieved from http://www.bir.gov.ph/images/bir_files/internal_communications_3/Full%20Text%20of%20RMO%202014/RMO%20No.%2028-2014.pdf (accessed on 10 March 2015).

Protection of the Bureaucracy against Tobacco Industry Interference. Retrieved from http:// w w w . s m o k e f r e e . d o h . g o v . p h / u p l o a d s / a t t a c h m e n t s /199597c6480f1fbad91e61cfd8c1a3a41a5621de.pdf (accessed on 10 March 2015).

re: CSC-DOH JMC No. 2010-01.

of Public Health Policies on Tobacco Control and Protection against Tobacco IndustryInterference. Retrieved from http://www.deped.gov.ph/sites/default/files/order/2012/DO_s2012_06.pdf (accessed on 10 March 2015).

Circular No. 2010-01. Retrieved from http://www.tobaccocontrollaws.org/files/live/Philippines/Philippines%20-%20Foreign%20Affairs%20Art.%205.3%20Memo%20-%20national.pdf (accessed on 10 March 2015).

Preventing Tobacco Industry Interference. Retrieved from http://seatca.org/dmdocuments/Art%205.3%20Toolkit%202012.pdf (accessed on 10 March 2015).

WHO Framework Convention on Tobacco Control. Decision: Protection of public healthpolicies with respect to tobacco control from commercial and other vested interests ofthe tobacco industry. FCTC/COP6(14). Sixth session Moscow, Russian Federation, 13–18 October 2014. Retrieved from http://apps.who.int/gb/fctc/PDF/cop6/FCTC_COP6%2814%29-en.pdf (accessed on 10 March 2015).

WHO Framework Convention on Tobacco Control. Decisions and Ancillary Documents.FCTC/COP/3/REC/1. Third Session, Durban, South Africa, 17-22 November 2008. Availableat http://apps.who.int/gb/fctc/PDF/cop3/FCTC_COP3_REC1-en.pdf (accessed on 10 March2015).

http://www.bir.gov.ph/images/bir_files/

http://www.deped.gov.ph/sites/default/files/order/2012/

http://www.tobaccocontrollaws.org/files/live/

http://seatca.org/dmdocuments/

http://apps.who.int/gb/fctc/PDF/cop3/FCTC_COP3_REC1-en.pdf

Working together to promotethe implementation of effective,evidence-based tobacco control measuresin Southeast Asia.

Southeast Asia Tobacco Control AllianceThakolsuk Place, Room 2B115 Thoddamri Road, Nakornchaisri, DusitBangkok 10300, ThailandWebsite: www.seatca.orgEmail: [email protected]

http://www.seatca.org

mailto:[email protected]