As the 11th Conference of the Parties (COP11) on the World Health Organisation’s Framework Convention on Tobacco Control (WHO FCTC) convenes in Geneva, critics warn that secretive proceedings are eroding public trust in global tobacco policy.
Most sessions are closed to independent scientists, journalists, Tobacco Harm Reduction (THR) advocates, and anyone suspected of having links with the tobacco industry.
The COP11 agenda is dominated by government delegates and accredited public health NGOs. Critics argue that people who use vapes or advocate for harm reduction are largely excluded from meaningful participation or denied a platform to present evidence and perspectives.
Some advocacy and independent groups have organised parallel events and submitted statements. Still, their involvement in the main COP11 sessions remains limited. The official proceedings are tightly controlled, raising concerns that the voices of vapers and harm reduction advocates are being silenced in favour of a more prohibitionist approach.
Follow us on WhatsApp | LinkedIn for the latest headlines
Voices of Consumers and Advocates
The Taxpayers Alliance (TPA) is hosting the second edition of Good COP 2.0, which includes consumers, users of smoke-free products, independent scientists, journalists and THR advocates.
During a panel discussion titled ‘A Dangerous Game – Is Stubborn FCTC Secretariat Ideology Eroding Trust in Public Health?’ and chaired by Maria Papaioannoy, a smoke-free advocate and user from Canada, participants expressed concern over the closed-door nature of COP WHO FCTC proceedings.
“Our voices are not allowed. Instead of finding accountability and owning up to their mistakes, we are seeing another doubling down. What we are seeing again is closed-door decision making, selective evidence reviews, and no engagement with anyone who has lived experience with safe products,” said Papaioannoy.
According to the WHO, over 100 million people worldwide now use e-cigarettes. Yet, this constituency continues to be largely excluded from COP discussions.
Heneage Mitchell, managing director of FACT Asia and a vaper, criticised COP11 for prioritising ideology over science.
“No, the WHO FCTC does not reflect evidence-based public health. It is influenced by misinformation, the rejection of scientific evidence, and the exclusion of key stakeholders, including vapers, smokers and THR organisations,” Mitchell said. He added that the absence of vapers and independent advocates at COP11 is proof that the process is flawed and one-sided.
Liza Katsiashvili, Community Manager at the World Vapers Alliance, argued that selective attendance undermines diversity of opinion.
“The COP meetings are not scientifically driven. The WHO is doing everything it can to discredit evidence showing that smoke-free products work. These innovations are very helpful, yet those who benefit from or advocate for them are not allowed at COP11, and their voices are not heard,” Katsiashvili said. She added that WHO treats all nicotine products as equally harmful, despite varying risks.
“That is not scientific evidence; that is ideology. The more ideological these institutions become, the more they silence consumers, eroding public trust. Consumers should not be treated as if they cannot make their own decisions.”
Science vs. Ideology
Critics argue that the FCTC’s focus on banning all nicotine products, including less harmful alternatives, while leaving cigarettes legal, is counterproductive and unethical. Millions of smokers who cannot quit using traditional methods are left behind. Excluding consumers from COP proceedings risks fostering distrust, as public health messaging may appear disconnected from smokers’ lived experiences and prioritises ideology over pragmatic, evidence-based solutions that could save lives.
Sign up for free AllAfrica Newsletters
Get the latest in African news delivered straight to your inbox
Gabriel Oke, a global health researcher from Nigeria, said the WHO’s stance on smoke-free products has driven people to seek information from digital media sources.
“Nowadays, even if something is reported in the news, people often seek a second opinion from podcasts or social media creators discussing these issues. WHO may soon no longer hold the same dominance because people now have alternative sources for information,” he said.
Public Trust at Stake
As COP11 continues, the exclusion of consumers and harm reduction advocates raises serious questions about whether global tobacco policy is keeping pace with scientific evidence and the needs of the public. Without transparency and inclusion, public trust in the FCTC’s approach may continue to be eroded.
