From February 2007 smoking in all public places of France will be banned. Under the category of public places fall stations, museums, public institutions and shops, though streets and private apartments, such as houses and hotel suits, are excluded from the list. The administrations of cafes, night clubs and restaurants have been given an adjournment till January 2008.

The first state in world history to completely ban smoking in public places was Bhutan. According to the Ministry of Trade and Industry of Bhutan the decision on banning smoking in public places was accepted with the aim of “defending present and future generations from the destructive consequence of smoking”. A fine for the violators of the norm amounts to 75 euros for private persons and 150 euros for the premises. Along with this the state is to cover one third of the sum of treatment for nicotine dependence – during the first month of treatment. Despite the fact that France is considered to be the country of smokers, polls show that 70% of citizens back the ban.

Similar measures are adopted in other countries of the world (including Europe). Thus, the first European country to ban smoking in public places was Ireland. State officials declare that the measure was a success – about 90% of all pubs and restaurants comply with the ban. Norway was the second country to prohibit smoking in public places on the national level. According to public opinion polls, the majority of population upholds the actions of government. Similar measure was adopted by the authorities of Canada.

Spain also leads an offensive against smoking. Thus, partial ban on smoking was introduced in bars and restaurants. The establishments trading in tobacco and alcohol should have special places for those who smoke and for those who do not. After that smoking was banned in public places and offices.

Besides, in accordance with outcomes of the research, published in May 2006 the heaviest smoking countries are Greece, Cyprus and Portugal.

Once again, health protection on the state level is fine but a number of questions and discussions emerge. A state is to inform its population on the harm of smoking and its negative effects. From the other point of view, is such a profound interference not a violation of public rights and freedoms? Regardless of the difference in the approach to this problem, all the sides share the belief that smoking is not healthy.