KOLKATA, INDIA - The impending launch of
Juul e-cigarettes in India was a factor in the government's
decision to ban the sale of vaping products, a top government
lawyer said on Tuesday while defending the move in a Kolkata
court.
Last month, India banned the sale and import of electronic
cigarettes, warning of a vaping "epidemic" among young people
and dashing plans of companies such as Juul Labs Inc and Philip
Morris International to sell products in the country.
Juul had aimed to launch its e-cigarette in India in late
2019 and had hired several senior executives in recent months,
Reuters has previously reported.
"What was impending was a nationwide launch of Juul ... it
(the government) chose to act immediately," additional solicitor
general Aman Lekhi told the court.
Lekhi made the remarks while defending two challenges
against the ban that have been filed by e-cigarettes importer
Plume Vapour and another company Woke Vapors.
He told the judge the cases were a "proxy for Juul" but did
not elaborate. He later told Reuters inside the courtroom: "We
feel they are a proxy for Juul, there's a very real
possibility".
A Juul spokesman declined to comment on the government's
remarks. Woke Vapors and Plume Vapour did not respond to
requests for comment.
Two senior Juul executives were present inside the packed
courtroom on Tuesday, seated for most of the two-hour hearing
next to the federal health ministry's bureaucrat who oversees
tobacco control, Vikas Sheel.
Tobacco vs e-cigarettes
Juul Labs, in which tobacco giant Altria Group Inc
owns a 35% stake, is facing increased scrutiny in the United
States, its home market, as teen use of e-cigarettes surges.
Even before the ban was announced, the Indian government had
said products such as Juul were harmful and could potentially
undermine its tobacco control efforts. More than 900 000 people
die each year in India due to tobacco-related illnesses.
However, India has 106 million adult smokers, second only to
China, making it a lucrative potential market for companies
selling both tobacco and vaping products.
Plume Vapour, one of the companies arguing against the ban,
told the court on Tuesday that "relative harm" from e-cigarettes
was less than from tobacco products and the government was
scaring consumers by banning the product.
The government's counsel Lekhi said e-cigarette's novelty
and attractiveness pose a public health danger, and the product
needs to be nipped in the bud. "You don't want a new substance
to cause addiction," he told the court.
The court on Tuesday did not put the ban order on hold, but
as a temporary relief revoked the current requirement for
sellers to submit their existing stock of e-cigarettes to
authorities for disposal.
The cases, which have emerged as a key legal test of the
government's ban order, will next be heard on November 14.