KUALA LUMPUR: Health Ministry had only prioritised revenue on tax collection when they decided to remove nicotine from the Poisons Act (PA) 1952, claimed several anti-tobacco and child advocates.
The Malaysian Council for Tobacco Control, Malaysian Green Lung Association and Voice of the Children Sdn Bhd also claimed the minister Dr Zaliha Mustafa's action was disproportionate as she was under a duty to protect public health.
"The minister's actions harm public health, particularly children who are the most vulnerable in society.
"She (Dr Zaliha) was acting on the wishes of the Finance Ministry and disregarding the decision of the Poisons Board.
"She failed to apply and exercise her own independent judgement as in expected of a reasonable Health Minister that is responsible for health, rights, and safety measures," claimed the group.
The group stated this in their judicial review application to challenge the Health Ministry directive issued three months ago.
The applicants filed the suit at the High Court here on Friday, naming Dr Zaliha and the government as the first and second respondents, respectively.
On April 1, the Health Ministry published a gazette notice stating that nicotine liquids and gels used in e-cigarettes and vape products had been granted exemption from poisons control.
The applicants contended that the Poisons Board unanimously voted against the impugned exemption on medical and health grounds.
The members of the board include the Health director-general, medical experts, pharmacists, specialists and those appointed by specialist organisations.
"The impugned exemption allows electronic cigarettes and vape products with nicotine to be sold openly and legally to anyone, including children and adolescents aged below 18 years old.
"The minister did not properly consider and engage the Poisons Board's decision, but proceeds to make the impugned order.
"It (impugned exemption) was stated to be for the purpose of enabling excise duties to be imposed on electronic cigarette and vape liquids containing nicotine.
"The minister failed to consult or adequately consult with the Poisons Board and there was therefore no effective 'consultation' as required by Section 6 of the PA," the applicants claimed.
Section 6 of the PA grants the minister power to amend the Schedule to the act in relation to the lists of poisons in consultation with the Poisons Board.
The applicants further claimed that the impugned exemption was made without due regard for the rights and contrary to the best interests of the child.
"The minister also did not afford relevant stakeholders including the applicants an effective right to be heard on the matter before making her decision."
The applicants are seeking a court order to declare the Health Ministry's directive in removing nicotine from the Poisons Act as null and void.
They are also further seeking a stay of proceedings on the order at the parliament session pending the disposal of their judicial review application.