The Human Rights Debate within the Kimberly Process

An estimated 200 officials representing 73 countries participating in the Kimberley Process (KP) will convene in Namibia next week for its “intersessional meeting.” During the meeting, six different working groups and committees will address an array of issues. Debates will range from minor items, such as whether public warnings should be issued for fake KP certificates, to major, earth-shaking items, such as a proposal on expanding the scheme’s mandate.

Outside of the working sessions and reports by the KP chairman, the scheduled plenary meeting (covering the “really important issues”) will focus on Zimbabwe and Cote d’Ivoire. I am not aware of any planned discussion about a recent Venezuela-related article published by prominent NGO Partnership Africa Canada (PAC). In this article, entitled “The Kimberley Sham,” PAC concludes that “in condoning the status quo, the Kimberley Process has become an active party in an overt diamond-smuggling enterprise.”

While the Venezuelan government has suspended itself from the KP, it is simultaneously collecting fees from issuing diamond-mining leases to many diggers’ cooperatives. International trading centers might be jealous of the active and thriving diamond trade on the Venezuelan side of the border in the region that includes neighboring Brazil and Guyana. There is neither a recession nor a credit crunch there; the region has turned into a “Kimberley-Offshore,” where one can trade as one pleases. What the PAC article omitted, however, is that some countries don’t want to jeopardize their political and diplomatic relations with Venezuela – certainly not for something as mundane and irrelevant as a few smuggled diamonds.

Fake, Counterfeit, Forged or Bought KP Certificates

It is not just the Venezuela issue that is ruining the KP’s reputation and effectiveness. The chairman of the KP, the amicable Bernhard Esau, is proposing to issue a warning saying, “Trade in rough diamonds is permitted only on the basis of authenticated KP certificates. Nevertheless, [member countries] have occasionally been confronted with the occurrence of fake KP certificates. These instances typically affect more than one Participant and can be addressed through cooperative actions.”

Then comes the operational part: “In order to protect the KPCS against the use of fake or forged KP certificates, it is therefore recommended that: Participants should examine KP certificates and, upon detection of fake certificates, Participants should liaise with the issuing country for confirmation; and specimen copies of the fake certificates, after removing the names of companies/individuals and clearly indicating that the certificates are specimen copies, may be uploaded for information of all Participants on the KP website and/or through KP Chair notice.”

This innocuous (and almost self-evident) proposal is nevertheless missing the point. It is the “political correctness” of the KP that wants to remove governmental responsibility by labelling these certificates as fakes, forgeries or counterfeits. There may be some. But the truth is that fully legitimate, authentic and official blank KP certificates “are for sale,” and that for a few dollars (between 1-1.5 percent, sometimes more) one can get an official KP certificate for any rough presented.

This is the real problem – but it is not politically correct to bring up because it implies corruption within the ranks of the Participating Countries. By not confronting the “real” issues, the KP will become increasingly discredited and ineffective. Incidentally, why should fake certificates only be circulated after removing the names of companies/individuals listed on them?

The KP chair talks about the need to protect the KPCS – i.e. to protect the “System”. What about protecting the rough trade and the diamond merchants? If fraudulent players finally are caught, then the KPCS wants to institutionalize ways to “protect them”? Come on, Bernhard Esau – you can do better than that!

Enlarging the Mandate: Including Human Rights

Dutch Foreign Minister Maxime Verhagen told Zimbabwe’s prime minister this week that his government should “act more effectively against the illegal trade in diamonds. Illegal diamond mining often involves serious human rights violations.” The Dutch minister did not refer to the four soldiers deployed by the Zimbabwe National Army to the Chiadzwa diamond fields in Manicaland who have died following shooting incidents believed to have been sparked by disputes over proceeds from the sale of smuggled diamonds.

Those who supposedly protect in the name of government are the very people who steal, smuggle, violate human rights and shoot each other as well. In Zimbabwe, according to human rights groups, government soldiers have killed at least 200 people in the diamond fields in the past few months.

Let’s also have a look at Angola: it was reported this week that, so far this year, Angolan police have deported more than 6,000 foreigners who were caught digging for diamonds illegally in the country's northeastern region of Lunda Norte. Based on experience, this “removal” of people also carries a human toll. Let’s hope that KP Participants will ask about Angola next week (and that NGOs will make their own inquiry), rather than commending the country for a job well done.

Let’s not kid ourselves. While we have human rights problems in producer countries, we also have them in cutting and trading centers and in consumer markets. Human rights violations are depressing universal phenomena. NGO Global Witness – apparently with the support of the US Kimberley Advisor – will raise a proposal next week in Namibia to widen the mandate of the KP and its controls over the diamond trade.

It is suggested to add the following wording to the KP’s Operational Document: “The Kimberley Process shall promote respect for human rights as described in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, and shall require their effective recognition and observance in the diamond industries of participating countries, and among the peoples, institutions and territories under their jurisdiction.”

There is not a decent person in the world who would argue against the importance of respecting human rights – just as everyone wholeheartedly supports hunger-alleviation campaigns or fights against human trafficking. These are all universal principles, which are so self-evident that one does not need to argue about them. And we shall not – ever.

The question is whether the KP should become the vehicle to advance human rights causes, which we all unequivocally endorse and support. But if so, we have to think what the ramifications are for the industry and the KP.

Can a country in which journalists are poisoned to death and diamond traders are jailed on trumped up charges without due legal process stay in the KP? Can a country in which indigenous Bushmen complain about their treatment by diamond companies stay in the KP? Can a country in which aboriginals believe a mine is destroying a sacred site stay in the KP? Can a country in which child labor is practiced stay in the KP? Can countries in which diamond diggers are exploited and survive on near-slave food income stay in the KP? Can a country with corrupt generals (and presidential daughters) pilfering the resource of the people stay in the KP? Can Lebanon, where the Hezbollah uses diamonds to finance terrorist activities, stay in the KP? Can a country where governments employ soldiers and brutal tactics to remove illegal diggers stay in the KP?

Who is going to draw the line? The Kimberley Plenary – which only operates on an unrealistic “consensus” basis? And where will the line be drawn? If the United Nations’ Universal Declaration of Human Rights will become part of the core KP mandate, something the United States now seems to be favoring, then in the first KP Plenary Session, countries producing together between one and two thirds of the world production will be kicked out of the KP. That’s an interesting way to kill off the scheme.

What the KP Really Needs…

In all honesty, we don’t believe that a mandate expansion is what is really needed – though we have to give some thought to the heavy-handedness in the diamond fields of some respected KP Participants. From our perspective, what the KP urgently needs at this time is to be implemented as it was designed to be implemented. If the NGOs are successful in getting the KP to that level, we’ll all salute them with the greatest of respect.

There is so much to do to clean up the KP well before contemplating widening the mandate. For instance, if the smugglers of Venezuela can use Guyana, Panama and Brazil to have the smuggled diamonds certified, the KP should take action – against all these nations. Regarding Guinea and Lebanon, the KP should start doing something tangible. The KP should clamp down on the black market that deals in legitimate KP certificates. Actions should also be taken against those countries that provide “collection points” for extorting money within the KP bureaucracy.

It is useless to bring up new principles or a widened mission in an organization that has proven not to be equipped to effectively manage a more limited mission.

Have a nice weekend.