Civil society organisations are angry at the failure of the Kimberley Process to address human rights violations around diamond mining in Marange in Zimbabwe, as well as other issues.
In June, the Kimberley Process member countries endorsed exports of diamonds from Marange. This culminated in a walk-out by NGOs from a Kimberley Process meeting in Kinshasa in June. About eight of the 15 NGOs that participate in the Kimberley Process met in Johannesburg in August and agreed to boycott the next meeting.
Some NGOs are considering whether to leave the process altogether, says Alan Martin, research director of Partnership Africa Canada (PAC) , but PAC is not one of them.
Without the participation of key NGOs, the process loses credibility. If diamonds become associated with human rights abuses, the industry’s attempts to associate them with love and romance will be futile.
World Diamond Council president Eli Izhakoff says the support of governments, industry and civil society in the Kimberley Process is essential, but the integrity of the process depends more on finding effective solutions to the issues at hand. “So the fact that two years have passed since the emergence of the Zimbabwe issue and we still have not achieved consensus about what should be done challenges its credibility more than any individual, organisation or coalition. We have to stop beating about the bush and achieve an agreement that everyone can live with. It will require compromise by all sides .”
Martin says the Kimberley Process is not addressing human rights abuses associated with diamond mining, either in Zimbabwe or in Angola, and it has lost meaningful oversight of Marange. Marange diamonds have filtered through SA and the United Arab Emirates. A third problem is the Kimberley Process’s reluctance to adopt institutional reforms. PAC wants it to adopt a third-party monitoring system and credible sanctions for non compliance, reform the decision- making process and bring the cutting and polishing industry into the system.
Martin Rapaport, who heads the Rapaport Group, an Israel-based diamond information company, has proposed a new certification scheme that will track diamonds from source to end product and provide different grades of compliance with ethical values.
In an editorial, issued in August, entitled “After Kimberley ... now what?”, Rapaport said the Kimberley Process is run by governments who see the issue around Marange not as one of human rights, but of governments’ right to control their own exports. He argued the process cannot be blamed for its failure to address human rights issues. Rather, every dealer, manufacturer and consumer should take responsibility for buying diamonds from legitimate sources.
“ We have the ability and obligation to control who we give our money to,” he said. “Let’s recognise that sometimes our decision about what we buy and where we buy is a life-and-death decision for someone else.”
Alan Martin says Rapaport’s ethical certification scheme would be a welcome way to increase the ethical reputation of diamonds but he is concerned it would cover only a small part of the market. The Kimberley Process was founded because of the blood diamond trade in Angola and Sierra Leone but it appears the original purpose has been forgotten.
Asked whether he considers the Kimberley Process is working, Petra Diamonds CEO Johan Dippenaar says he is aware of the criticism.
“As producers, we want it to work well because the majority of diamonds are produced by big companies (De Beers, Alrosa, Rio Tinto and BHP Billiton) and other listed transparent companies like us, Gem Diamonds and Trans Hex, in a responsible manner. But after commentary on Zimbabwe, people are asking if it is working as well as it is intended to. We are following it to see if there is anything in these reports.”
No comments:
Post a Comment