President of the Foundation of Concerned Arts Professionals (FOCAP), Kojo Preko Dankwa has criticised the Food and Drugs Authority (FDA) for its directive to ban alcohol advertisement by celebrities.
In an interview on TV3’s New Day, June 25, Kojo Preko Dankwa described the directive as a “lazy” approach.
According to him, the FDA’s basis of referring to a report by the World Health Organisation to institute its ban is unfounded.
He claimed that there has not been any report by the WHO suggesting a ban on alcohol advertisement by celebrities as the FDA purports.
“Which of the WHO report are they talking about? All these reports speaks on global harmfulness when it comes to alcohol for the adolescent [and not on the effect of celebrity advertising on minors],” he stated.
He contended that the FDA is ‘getting all wrong’ with its outright ban.
“It’s something they are not thinking outside the box, whichever WHO report they are using, they are not reading it well because what we have in front of us and read, none of them stated that we should ban. They were rather dealing with athletes and giving solutions as to how the marketing can be done. They did not go outright with whatever FDA is doing,” he added.
Background
The FDA in its guidelines for the Advertisement of Foods published on February 1, 2016 stipulates that “No well-known personality or professional shall be used in alcoholic beverage advertising.”
The authority explained that the guideline was necessary to prevent minors from being addicted to alcohol due to the influence of celebrities.
The FDA further noted that the ban was in adherence with a policy by the World Health Organisation (WHO), and also part of efforts to protect children and young ones from being lured into alcoholism.
However, a citizen Mark Darlington filed a suit against the FDA’s directive praying the Apex court to hold as unconstitutional the directive as it violated the right against discrimination as guaranteed by Article 17 of the 1992 Constitution.
But the Supreme court in a 5-2 majority decision on Wednesday, June 19 dismissed the case and upheld the FDA’s directive.
The court held that the directive by FDA was not unreasonable and excessive, adding that it didn’t contravene the provision of the constitution.
