Minerals from the Great Lake Region, more particularly eastern DRC, have attracted international attention and been labeled "conflict" or "blood minerals", as the mining resources there are often found to be financing several armed groups in the region. The EU’s initiative to establish a due-diligence mechanism that guarantees a compulsory check and accompanying measures on these raw materials to all EU companies represents a symbolic message. Yet, there are still downsides to this legislation and a stronger commitment is required.
In the first quarter of 2017, we have seen a large political standstill in the region of Grate Lakes, particularly the DRC – a deadlocked election process and lack of commitment by both opposition leaders and government authorities, while the eastern part of the country remains plagued by violent conflict. One of the motiving factors that contribute to this conflict is the mineral resources exploitation. Simmering disputes between armed groups over mineral exploitation reflect the high stakes involved in using revenues from these minerals for their enrichment and to finance their warring efforts.
Regional powers attempted to strengthen their position to promote responsible business in the region and hamper armed groups from financing their disputes, while global powers such as the European Union sought to cement their influence by its Conflict Mineral Law, which was approved March 2017. This represented a commitment from the EU to put this issue in their agenda, since these minerals are used in great part of block’s economy, including automotive, electronics, industrial machinery and others.
Surprisingly recent, the strategic relevance of this law came as a response to two due-diligence frameworks for responsible global supply chain of minerals in conflict-affected regions, namely the OCDE Due Diligence Guidance and the US Doddy-Frank Law. Among other terms, both frameworks serve as a common reference for suppliers and stockholders in the mineral supply chain sector and oblige companies to report whether or not they are using products coming from high-risk regions. As the OSCE Guidance states, it indents to ‘help companies respect human rights and avoid contributing to conflict through their mineral sourcing practices’.
While this has been a political incentive for the EU to develop its own mineral regulation mechanism, some issues pertaining to its practical terms remained, especially when it comes to the choice between a voluntary or compulsory system for Member States. After a number of three-way talks, involving the Council, Commission and Parliament, a political agreement was reached and the main points elucidated were:
- Importers of mineral and metal originating from conflict regions must apply due diligence. Exceptions may be made for small volumes importations.
- Importers of minerals in the form of semi-processed products might be exempted from these requirements.
- The OSCE Guidance will be the main source of due-diligence terms.
- A regular and updated list of high-risks areas and regions will be composed by experts.
This initiative has not only yielded a positive trend in terms of stimulating companies to comply with their commitment to the protections of human rights, but also set monitoring and managing mechanisms to refrain armed groups from fueling the region with violence.
The question to rise, however, is to what extent this legislation will bring benefits to the local population.
The question to rise, however, is to what extent this legislation will bring benefits to the local population by only legally requiring companies (only the ones whose imports exceeds a certain volume) to comply with their due-diligence. Another downfall is the fact that the EU will rely on expert’s analysis from a limited list of conflict and high-risks areas, neglecting the multi-dimensions and rapidly changing environment of conflict-settings. There are also important gaps on the law’s accompanying measures, particularly at a local dimension.
Hence, there is the need to invest in capacity-building incentives locally, especially on local artisans, while also ensuring a proper implementation of traceability tools. In addition to this, there is a conjunction of issues that must be addressed in a vernacular perspective. For instance, the Government forces involvement in mining activities in certain countries and mineral smuggling throughout the region are important factors that need to be taken into consideration. Political dialogue between EU and local governments must be also strengthened. Gaining a local perspective on the realities on the ground and including locals in this attempt to break the link between minerals and conflict can be seen as a profitable strategy for the EU. Moreover, it gives companies investing in the area the opportunity to generate income growth and prosperity throughout the region, without potentially contributing to serious human rights abuses and conflict.