By Yasmin Ramlan
KUALA LUMPUR, Mar 20 – Health Minister Datuk Seri Dr Dzulkefly Ahmad has denied that the removal of the generational endgame (GEG) provision from the anti-smoking bill was a result of influence from tobacco and vape industry lobbyists, as claimed by his deputy.
Instead, he said the decision was made solely due to constitutional issues.
Addressing the Dewan Rakyat, Dr Dzulkefly clarified that upon checking the Hansard, he found that the statement made by Datuk Lukanisman Awang Sauni in the lower House on March 14 was factually incorrect.
“I believe that the concerns raised, alleging industry or lobbyists’ influence on the government and Cabinet, are unfair. This is factually incorrect, as stated by the deputy minister when questioned about the matter,” he said today.
Dr Dzulkefly was responding to a supplementary question by Muar MP Syed Saddiq Syed Abdul Rahman, who sought clarification over conflicting information regarding the true reason behind the removal of the GEG provision.
The Muda lawmaker highlighted discrepancies between the response provided by the deputy minister last week and the official statement by the ministry on the matter, which cited constitutional restrictions.
Lukanisman had told the Dewan Rakyat last week that lobbyists from the industry had met with MPs in Parliament ahead of the debate on the Control of Smoking Products for Public Health Bill 2023 in November last year and ultimately influenced the decision.
The GEG provision, which sought to implement a blanket ban on smoking on anyone born from 2007, was included in the original version of the bill tabled last June.
However, the revised version tabled by then Health Minister Dr Zaliha Mustafa, later dropped the generational provision.
The bill was later passed by both Houses of Parliament and gazetted into law, with the GEG provision replaced by prohibitions limited to individuals aged below 18 years.
Commenting further, Dr Dzulkefly expressed his regret over the issue, particularly former health minister Khairy Jamaluddin’s criticism of the government for purportedly bowing down to pressure from lobbyists and describing the move as “cowardly and irresponsible”.
The minister, however, stressed that the decision to drop the GEG provision was due to constitutional issues raised by the Attorney-General’s Chambers (AGC).
“It has nothing to do at all with lobbyists or the perception made by outsiders,” he said.
“I am ready to discuss this matter to clear the air. I stand ready to be corrected and firmly state that the decision made was not influenced by lobbyists, industry players or any other parties. It involves a stance taken by the AGC,” he said.
Previously, it was reported that the removal of GEG was because it was deemed to have ontradicted Article 8(1) of the Federal Constitution, which states every person shall be equal under the law and have equal protection of the law.
