The Department of Health has responded to public submissions on the Tobacco Products and Electronic Delivery Systems Control Bill, offering to change some definitions to assuage concerns.
Key among the proposed changes is a revision of definitions to differentiate between combustible and non-combustible products, some of which could be exempt from new restrictions.
The Bill, which has been in process for several years, concluded its latest round of public consultations at the end of 2025.
During these consultations, various issues were raised, particularly regarding plain packaging requirements, the rise of illicit products, and a lack of enforcement powers to implement the new laws.
Broadly, the bill aims to clamp down on tobacco use and regulate grey areas, such as electronic delivery systems (vapes), in South Africa through various measures.
Some measures have been welcomed by stakeholders, but many have been rejected or criticised for going too far.
Measures like banning smoking in all indoor public spaces, in certain outdoor areas, and sales to minors have been more acceptable, while the banning of advertising, promotion and the like have not gone over well.
The proposal to force tobacco companies to sell their products in plain packaging has also been controversial.
Addressing the Portfolio Committee on Health, Minister Aaron Motsoaledi was not convinced by many of the arguments against the laws, noting that their aim is to promote health.
The Bill is not banning tobacco and related products, he said, but aims to curb indiscriminate marketing and supply of tobacco and nicotine-containing products to protect the health of South Africans
“The Bill’s objective is therefore to decrease easy access, initiation, and illnesses caused by tobacco and nicotine use, to keep South Africans healthy and to reduce the strain on the health system,” he said.
The department was also not convinced by arguments from the tobacco and vaping industry that new generation nicotine products, like vaping, were a harm reduction strategy.
It said that this premise is “simply wrong” and based on “incorrect claims” that smokers cannot or will not quit smoking.
“In reality, the majority of smokers dislike being nicotine dependent and want to quit,” it said.
“Evidence-based tobacco dependence treatments—not vapes—exist and are safe and cost-effective. The goal is cessation and relapse prevention to achieve long-term abstinence.”
Most nicotine-delivery products, including heated tobacco and e-cigarettes, are devices of nicotine inhalation, it said, defeating the aim of harm reduction.
What will change
Despite the overall pushback against “conflicts of interest” within the tobacco industry against the laws, the department did propose some changes to address concerns.
The department said that changing definitions to differentiate combustible and non-combustible tobacco products would assist with better policy setting.
It said it is willing to consider exemptions for non-combustible products (such as snuff, nicotine patches, and e-cigarettes) from certain packaging and labelling requirements, provided these products do not make false or misleading claims.
It also has no intention of banning the use of snuff, which is used in traditional practices.
The department also proposes expanding the ranks of enforcement officers to include metro, provincial, and national police officers, traffic officers, port health officers, immigration officers, and border management officers.
This would address the shortage of enforcement officers needed to clamp down on illicit trade.
Unfortunately for the industry bodies, which were hoping to convince the department that plain packaging would be detrimental to its aims and encourage counterfeiting, the government is unconvinced.
“Plain packaging does not eliminate anti-counterfeit safeguards such as tax stamps, unique identifiers, track and tracing markings, security inks, covert markings and digital authentication codes,” it said.
“Plain packaging standardises brand presentation to reduce product appeal and marketing power. It also enables the application of graphic and text health warnings.”
Finally, addressing concerns over “disproportionate penalties”, where those violating the laws could end up with a fine and/or prison sentence of up to 10 years, the department said this is a maximum, not a minimum.
“Presiding officers have the discretion to sentence the offenders to lesser sentences due to mitigating circumstances. This provides protection to offenders,” it said.
“A combination of strengthening enforcement and prescribing stricter penalties may help deter violations and foster compliance.”
