Controversy Surrounding Indonesia's Tobacco and E-Cigarette Regulation Draft

Sep.19.2024
Controversy Surrounding Indonesia's Tobacco and E-Cigarette Regulation Draft
Indonesia's Health Ministry is asked to suspend discussions on tobacco and e-cigarette safety regulations, sparking industry concerns.

According to a report from Metrotv News on September 18, the Indonesian Ministry of Health has been asked to suspend discussions on the draft of the 2024 Tobacco and E-cigarette Product Safety Regulation (RPMK). The regulation has been criticized for restricting the market space for tobacco and e-cigarette products, and potentially harming Indonesia's tobacco farming and tobacco industry chain.


According to reports, this suggestion was put forward during a national dialogue event held at the Ashley Hotel in Jakarta on September 17 by pesantren and the Community Development Center (P3M).


The event was attended by a total of 50 representatives from government agencies, farmers' associations, trade unions, retailers associations, businesses, tobacco industry associations, civil society alliances, academia, religious leaders, and media. P3M Director Sarmidi Husna expressed concerns about the RPMK 2024 draft primarily due to its proposed plain packaging regulations, which are seen as restrictive to the tobacco industry. Husna noted that there was insufficient public participation in the drafting process, making it unrepresentative.


Husna further explained that some provisions in the draft may cause harm to tobacco farmers, small and medium-sized enterprises, various associations, and the tobacco industry, triggering strong opposition from various parties.


Benguet Saragih, from the Disease Control Working Group at the Ministry of Health, clarified that RPMK 2024 is not aimed at getting people to quit smoking, but rather is intended to prevent children from smoking.


In response, the Chairman of the National Association of Islamic Scholars (PBNU), Miftah Faqih, emphasized that the process of formulating any laws must include a balanced participation from all parties and focus on the common good, otherwise these laws will be ineffective and unfair. The representative of the Ministry of Industry, Nugraha Prasetya Yogi, also stated that the Ministry of Industry was not included in the previous law-making process, which is very detrimental to trade and industry.


Union representative Sudarto pointed out that since the enactment of the 2003 Health Law and Government Regulation No. 28 of 2004, tobacco regulations have gradually been implemented, significantly impacting the tobacco leaf and tobacco products industry. Sudarto emphasized that industrial policies and tax policies have also been used to suppress legal tobacco consumption, leading to the frequent appearance of illegal tobacco products.


Gunawan from the Indonesian Commission for Social Justice and Human Rights (IHCS) is calling for the coordination of existing regulations and laws to protect the interests of tobacco farmers. Indonesian parliament member Muhammad Misbakhun mentioned that the influence of international giants has caused local economies and tobacco farmers to go bankrupt, and therefore calls for the government to be a facilitator in finding a solution to the problem.


Representatives from the Indonesian Tobacco Association, Budiman, believe that restricting the sale of tobacco products will have negative effects on production, employment, and raw material sourcing. Additionally, Kusnasi Mudi, the Secretary General of the National Tobacco Growers Association (APTI), also stated that the government needs to reexamine this regulation and communicate with the entire industry chain to prevent significant impact on the future development of the industry.


We welcome news tips, article submissions, interview requests, or comments on this piece.

Please contact us at info@2firsts.com, or reach out to Alan Zhao, CEO of 2Firsts, on LinkedIn


Notice

1.  This article is intended solely for professional research purposes related to industry, technology, and policy. Any references to brands or products are made purely for objective description and do not constitute any form of endorsement, recommendation, or promotion by 2Firsts.

2.  The use of nicotine-containing products — including, but not limited to, cigarettes, e-cigarettes, nicotine pouchand heated tobacco products — carries significant health risks. Users are responsible for complying with all applicable laws and regulations in their respective jurisdictions.

3.  This article is not intended to serve as the basis for any investment decisions or financial advice. 2Firsts assumes no direct or indirect liability for any inaccuracies or errors in the content.

4.  Access to this article is strictly prohibited for individuals below the legal age in their jurisdiction.

 

Copyright

 

This article is either an original work created by 2Firsts or a reproduction from third-party sources with proper attribution. All copyrights and usage rights belong to 2Firsts or the original content provider. Unauthorized reproduction, distribution, or any other form of unauthorized use by any individual or organization is strictly prohibited. Violators will be held legally accountable.

For copyright-related inquiries, please contact: info@2firsts.com

 

AI Assistance Disclaimer

 

This article may have been enhanced using AI tools to improve translation and editorial efficiency. However, due to technical limitations, inaccuracies may occur. Readers are encouraged to refer to the cited sources for the most accurate information.

We welcome any corrections or feedback. Please contact us at: info@2firsts.com

U.S. Health Groups Seek to Overturn FDA Enforcement Discretion for Pending PMTAs as Altria's Helix, NJOY and AVM Move to Intervene
U.S. Health Groups Seek to Overturn FDA Enforcement Discretion for Pending PMTAs as Altria's Helix, NJOY and AVM Move to Intervene
American Vapor Manufacturers (AVM) and Altria subsidiaries Helix Innovations and NJOY filed separate motions on October 7, 2026, seeking to intervene on the FDA's side in a lawsuit challenging its enforcement guidance for certain e-cigarette and nicotine pouch products with pending premarket tobacco product applications (PMTAs). Seven public health and tobacco-control organizations, including the Campaign for Tobacco-Free Kids, sued the agency in July to overturn the policy. AVM argues that vacating the guidance could disrupt orders, inventory, retail distribution and investments in regulatory submissions.
Regulations
Oct.09
California Lawmakers Pass Disposable Nicotine Vape Ban, With Sales Prohibition Set for 2028
California Lawmakers Pass Disposable Nicotine Vape Ban, With Sales Prohibition Set for 2028
According to CBS Los Angeles on August 27, 2026, California lawmakers have passed Assembly Bill 762, which would phase out disposable, battery-embedded nicotine vapes in the state. If signed by Governor Gavin Newsom, manufacturing and importation of the covered products would be prohibited beginning January 1, 2027, followed by a sales ban on January 1, 2028. Driven primarily by concerns over electronic waste, lithium-battery fires and environmental pollution, the legislation would further shift California’s legal vape market toward rechargeable, refillable or replaceable-pod devices.
Aug.28
Yinghe-Controlled Vape Maker SKE Ordered to Post £569,039 Security as It Pursues Crystal Bar Design Infringement Case in UK
Yinghe-Controlled Vape Maker SKE Ordered to Post £569,039 Security as It Pursues Crystal Bar Design Infringement Case in UK
The UK High Court has ordered Chinese vape manufacturer Shenzhen SKE Technology to provide £569,039 ($776,000) in security for costs in its design infringement proceedings against Vapepen London and other defendants over its Crystal Bar vape product. The court did not accept the defendants’ main argument that recovering costs from a China-based company would face significant enforcement obstacles, but found that SKE had not sufficiently disclosed its own financial position. The order is procedural and does not determine the underlying infringement claims.
News
Aug.21
Swedish-Founded Nicotine Pouch Retailer GotPouches Shifts to U.S.-Based Operations, Reaching Over 25 States
Swedish-Founded Nicotine Pouch Retailer GotPouches Shifts to U.S.-Based Operations, Reaching Over 25 States
Swedish-founded online nicotine pouch retailer GotPouches has completed the localization of its U.S. operations under UpNorth Retail LLC, with corporate operations in Franklin, Tennessee, domestic fulfillment from Nashville and U.S.-based customer support. The company says its catalog covers more than 20 nicotine pouch brands and it currently serves customers in more than 25 U.S. states.
Sep.18
Product | JNR Launches Shisha Hookah 70K E-Hookah With 60ml E-Liquid and 0.6% Nicotine
Product | JNR Launches Shisha Hookah 70K E-Hookah With 60ml E-Liquid and 0.6% Nicotine
JNR has introduced the Shisha Hookah 70K, a high-capacity rechargeable disposable vape designed around a hookah-inspired experience. The device comes prefilled with 60ml of e-liquid at 6mg/ml (0.6%) nicotine strength, alongside a 1,000mAh rechargeable battery and a 0.38Ω single mesh coil. It also features adjustable airflow and battery and e-liquid level displays. JNR claims the device can deliver up to 70,000 puffs and offers more than 20 flavors. Retail listings for the product have appeared in markets including Tunisia.
Market
Aug.24 by 2Firsts Perspectives
JUUL2 Sued Within a Week of FDA Authorization as AJ Marketing Alleges Infringement of Programmable Vape Patent
JUUL2 Sued Within a Week of FDA Authorization as AJ Marketing Alleges Infringement of Programmable Vape Patent
Less than a week after JUUL2 received U.S. FDA marketing authorization on August 28, 2026, JUUL Labs was sued for patent infringement in federal court in Delaware. AJ Marketing LLC filed the complaint on September 3, alleging that both JUUL 1 and JUUL2 infringe U.S. Patent No. 8,851,068 B2. The patent covers aspects of programmable electronic vaporization devices, including controls over dose delivery, usage frequency and operating parameters. The plaintiff is seeking reasonable royalties and ongoing royalties tied to the remaining life of the patent. JUUL has not yet publicly responded to the case.
Sep.10