I understand the pro-tobacoo stance of Mr. Alain L?Évêque, (l?Express 18th August), but I wish I could make out exactly what or who he is trying to defend. Is it the Tobacco Industry , a rogue industry which kills 5 million people every year ? That cannot be. By his own admission, ?smoking kills?.It?s bad?. We know. About that, I therefore rest my case. Mr. L?Évêque, who is so well informed, must also know that the World Bank, joined by a large majority of countries, has taken a stance against tobacco for?economic reasons! (Curbing the Epidemic- WB report 1999).

Could it be tobacco growing in Rodrigues? That cannot be either. Why! Would Mr. L?Évêque have us all believe that it is a privilege for the Rodriguan people to be involved in a polluting activity which has been rejected by developed countries who are keen to protect their land and their farmers? According to the tobacco Atlas, tobacco growing has decreased by 50 % in developed countries and has trebled in third world countries in the last three decades. The statistics provided by Mr. L?Évêque himself prove the point; all the countries he has cited are third-world countries! I owe him a ?thank you? note to for that. Besides, even if the Rodriguans accepted to be the bin of the world and even if they overlooked the fact that growing tobacco is tantamount to growing death at a time when we are right in the middle of a food crisis, I?d be interested to know how many ?hand-to-mouth dirt farmers? have been able to make money through tobacco growing anywhere in the world!

Oh yes! The right of smokers! ?It?s important to protect free choice? Mr. L?Évêque says. Who would disagree with that?! We have always believed in choice. The choice of adults to do with their body what they wish. Inherent in the choice to smoke is other people?s right to choose to increase the probability of dying at a later stage and some other way than through lung cancer. The right to swing one?s fist stops where other people?s nose (and lungs) begins. Many responsible smokers understood the risks of passive smoking well before the laws to protect non-smokers were being envisaged and have been abstaining from imposing polluted air on their children, family members, friends, colleagues and workers.

Our argument is very simple. We are not against smokers. We are not against smoking. Our motivation is very simple: while we would fight to the last drop of our blood for the rights of smokers as we have fought for the right to abortion, sexual orientations, religious beliefs and other similar issues, we would also like to protect our children who are being targeted even in primary schools and who become nicotine-dependent for life before they are of age to make a choice. We would like to protect workers who, while making a living, have to put up with polluted carcinogenic air. We would like to stand for the farmers who could put their land to much better and more profitable use if they are given similar help and incentives as the tobacco industry is insidiously luring them with. Encouraging tobacco and imposing smoke on others is not freedom. It is the worst form of dictatorship! The allusion that anti-tobacco ?lobby groups? push for legislation to suit ?their own self-interest?, coming from someone who is defending a 200-billion-dollar industry is so ironic that it calls for absolutely no comment!

Touria PRAYAG