In a major defeat for evidence-driven public health initiatives, Uganda’s Alcoholic Drinks Control Bill was recently rejected by Parliament. The Alcoholic Drinks Control Bill aimed to implement critical, evidence-based alcohol policy solutions to prevent and decrease alcohol harm in the country.
This defeat for people’s health came after intense lobbying and influence from the alcohol industry. A report from the Parliamentary Joint Committee on Tourism, Trade and Industry and Health provides a revealing case study of how the alcohol industry exerts its influence to shape – or in this case derail – legislation that promotes public health.
Why an alcohol law is needed: Alcohol harm in Uganda
In November 2022, Movendi International reported in a Special Feature about the journey towards a modern, comprehensive alcohol law in Uganda, starting with the news that Parliament gave support to Member of Parliament Sarah Opendi to draft the Alcohol Control Bill.
This was and is badly needed because the current alcohol laws in Uganda, such as The Liquor Act Cap. 93, The Portable Spirits Act Cap. 97, and the Enguli Act (Manufacturing and Licensing Act Cap. 86) were enacted as far back as the 1960s – remnants of colonialism.
According to the Global Burden of Disease study, alcohol harm puts a severe burden on Uganda: For example, Uganda faces a dramatic increase in cancers caused by alcohol. Since 1990 there is a 20% increase in the number of DALYs per 100,000 people due to cancers caused by alcohol in the country. Another example is that road injuries caused by alcohol have increased by 40% since 1990, and there has been no improvement since 2009. At the same time, overall road injuries are steadily decreasing, and have almost halved in the last 30 years. The third example is that self-harm and interpersonal violence due to alcohol has increased by 43% since 1990.
Key findings illustrating Uganda’s alcohol burden:
- The contribution of alcohol to health harm is growing in Uganda.
- Among 15–49-year-olds, alcohol is the second biggest risk factor for disease and premature death in Uganda.
- Alcohol caused at least 8,800 deaths in Uganda in 2021.
The latest GBD data reveal a clear and urgent case for action on alcohol as major cause of death and disease in Uganda.
And local data and experiences also show how alcohol impedes economic productivity in Uganda. For instance in the Acholi Sub-region alcohol harm is escalating and severely impacting productivity.
Community concerns about alcohol’s negative impact on productivity among both adult men and youth came to light during a gathering of community leaders, which was convened by Chief Justice Alfonse Owiny-Dollo and former Uganda People’s Congress (UPC) Party President Olara Otunnu, in late 2023. During this assembly, local government officials and youth leaders highlighted the imminent threats posed by alcohol to both public health and socioeconomic development. A matter of particular concern was the prevalent influence of industry interventions in promoting the sale of alcohol within the Acholi region.
The harm caused by the practices and products of the alcohol industry can be reversed through implementation of evidence-based, cost-effective, and high-impact public policy measures: the alcohol policy best buys:
- Increasing alcohol beverage excise taxes,
- Restricting access to retailed alcohol beverages, and
- Comprehensive advertising, promotion and sponsorship bans.
The Alcoholic Drinks Control Bill contained measures across the alcohol advertising and availability dimensions and thus made it a threat to alcohol industry profits.
The case study: 4 key examples of Big Alcohol interference
Our analysis of alcohol interference against the Alcoholic Drinks Control Bill is a new case study that exposes the recurring tropes and tactics of Big Alcohol lobbying against public health policy.”
Pierre Andersson
Uganda is one of the countries in the African region where the alcohol industry has interfered against public health alcohol policy action for decades and where such interference has been documented.
For instance in June 2024 a study revealed how Big Alcohol deploys social media to create a parallel universe where actual alcohol harms and effective policy solutions are absent.
The alcohol industry presents itself as indispensable to Uganda’s future and appears to have developed relationships with politicians, partnerships with government, and built a coalition with farmers. This means the alcohol industry may be well positioned to oppose public health policy measures, even though their arguments lack substance and are at odds with the evidence.
And already in 2009, a research article exposed alcohol industry interference to derail the National Alcohol Policy formulation in Uganda and three other African countries.
Our analysis of alcohol interference against the Alcoholic Drinks Control Bill is a new case study that exposes the recurring tropes and tactics of Big Alcohol lobbying against public health policy.
1. Inflating Jobs and Revenue Figures
One of the most explicit examples of alcohol industry influence can be seen in the Committee’s repeated emphasis on the sector’s economic contribution. The report devotes significant space to outlining the number of jobs created and the tax revenue generated by the alcohol industry. The report relies exclusively on data provided solely by the alcohol industry, which is a significant concern. Research shows that the alcohol industry routinely inflates these figures.
The report includes data provided by major alcohol companies that are subsidiaries of multinational alcohol giants, such as Nile Breweries Limited (owned by AB InBev) and Uganda Breweries Limited (owned by Diageo) to highlight the industry’s contributions to the economy over the past four years. This focus on the economic value of the alcohol industry downplays the significant health, social, and economic harms that were meant to be addressed by the Bill. The heavy focus on jobs and revenue serves as a smokescreen, deflecting attention from the real issue of public health and safety.
2. Inflating the Threat of Illicit Alcohol to Protect Industry Interests
A recurring theme in the Committee’s report is the issue of illicit alcohol, which is used to argue against stricter regulation of the alcohol industry. However, given that the data on illicit alcohol comes from an industry-sponsored report, there are significant concerns about its accuracy and the industry’s vested interest in deflecting attention away from much-needed regulations of its own practices.
Evidence shows that the prevalence of illicit or unrecorded alcohol is primarily influenced by a country’s specific characteristics, such as its regulatory environment, rather than policies on pricing, availability, or marketing. Well-designed, evidence-based alcohol policies – when paired with targeted countermeasures and robust enforcement – can effectively reduce the prevalence of illicit or unrecorded alcohol, while simultaneously improving public health outcomes and increasing government revenue.
3. Undermining Public Health in Favour of Economic Interests
While the report acknowledges the importance of regulating alcohol consumption, the focus remains on boosting industrial contributions to Uganda’s GDP. This approach overlooks the significant potential savings that evidence-based alcohol policies could bring to the healthcare system by reducing alcohol-related diseases and healthcare costs, ultimately benefiting both public health and the economy.
This framing reflects an industry narrative that positions alcohol as a necessary commodity for economic development, ignoring the massive burden alcohol-related harm places on the healthcare system and society.
Another notable point of industry influence is the Committee’s critique of proposed licensing regulations and advertising restrictions. For instance, the report argues that implementing additional licensing fees on alcohol businesses would amount to “double taxation” and would be unfair to businesses already paying trade licenses . This argument is directly in line with industry interests, as the alcohol industry has long resisted attempts to introduce stricter licensing regimes that could curb alcohol availability.
4. Parliament Committee Chooses Industry Over People’s Health
Remarkably and in my opinion shockingly, there are no references to the submissions of civil society, such as the Uganda Alcohol Policy Alliance that lead advocacy for an improved and evidence-based Alcoholic Drinks Control Bill, in the report, other than a note that they are among the stakeholders who met with the committee and sent written submissions.
In conclusion, the Alcoholic Drinks Control Bill in Uganda was effectively sabotaged by a combination of economic arguments, fear-mongering over illicit alcohol, and resistance to regulation from the alcohol industry. The influence of the alcohol industry is evident throughout the Committee’s report, which prioritises industry profits over the well-being of the Ugandan people.
Big Alcohol has derailed and delayed public health advances in Uganda before
The rejection of the Alcoholic Drinks Control Bill represents a missed opportunity for Uganda to protect its citizens from alcohol harm. It is a stark reminder of how the alcohol industry’s lobbying efforts can derail public health legislation, even in the face of overwhelming evidence of alcohol’s negative social and health impacts.”
Pierre Andersson
Movendi International has chronicled the journey towards a modern and comprehensive alcohol law in Uganda over the years – with more than 40 articles since 2013.
In Uganda, the alcohol industry derailed the development of a national alcohol policy for many years. In 2019, the alcohol industry also delayed the introduction of the sachet ban. Already in 2016, parliament attempted to develop a modern, evidence-based and public health oriented alcohol bill. But the legislative effort was blocked by alcohol industry interference and never made much progress. And during the coronavirus pandemic, alcohol companies defied COVID-19 counter-measures to maximize profits, instead of protecting people’s health.
The rejection of the Alcoholic Drinks Control Bill represents a missed opportunity for Uganda to protect its citizens from alcohol harm. It is a stark reminder of how the alcohol industry’s lobbying efforts can derail public health legislation, even in the face of overwhelming evidence of alcohol’s negative social and health impacts.
Moving forward, public health advocates must continue to challenge the narrative that economic benefits justify the social costs of alcohol. Only by exposing and countering Big Alcohol interference can we hope to achieve effective alcohol policy that protect public health.
