How to enforce due diligence? Making EU-legislation on 'conflict minerals' effective

Abstract

To reach the objectives stated in the draft legislation, the European Union has to make due diligence on “conflict minerals” mandatory for EU companies. This will increase the demand for “conflict-free” minerals, which will act as an incentive for speeding up local mapping and tracing efforts and the return of smelters to the DR Congo. Downstream companies are in a position to conduct due diligence with marginal to manageable costs, despite the complexity involved. The competitive disadvantage of European companies towards Asian companies is more imaginary than real. For due diligence legislation to be effective in conflict regions, EU actors ought to support multi-stakeholder initiatives on the ground that have greater credibility than government or industry schemes. Instead of rigid certification procedures that create high administrative burdens on state and economic actors, priority should be given to flexible and reliable instruments of mapping and tracing that smelters can use for their supply chain due diligence. In conflict regions, certificates risk being tainted by reports of fraud, as the challenges to governance can be expected to be similar to those in the Great Lakes region. A policy approach that enables rather than prohibits artisanal mining is better suited to providing market access to informal artisanal mining that does not have links to armed actors. Legality should not be made a precondition for recognising artisanal mines as conflict-free to avoid punishment of an entire sector for the links to conflict financing of a few.