Is the Kimberley Process ruining Zimbabwe and can it ever work?

The Kimberley Process is now in its seventh year and is the most renowned certification method for identifying and monitoring the sales of non-conflict diamonds. It started as a joint venture between governments and diamond-trade members, with the backing of the United Nations and the aim of ensuring that the profits from diamond sales no longer fund rebel wars against legitimate governments.

According to their website: 

“The Kimberley Process (KP) is open to all countries that are willing and able to implement its requirements. As of November 2008, the KP has 49 members, representing 75 countries….KP members account for approximately 99.8% of the global production of rough diamonds.”

Map of Kimberley Process Member States

 And one of these 49 member states is none other than Zimbabwe, whose Marange Diamond Fields have been in and out of the news countless times over the past year. And never for the right reasons.

On Friday 29^th October 2010, Channel 4 broadcast a short episode of their Unreported World series. This particular episode centered on how Marange diamonds are being used to pay the Zimbabwean army to support Robert Mugabe’s Zanu-PF Party, a political party who are supposed to form part of Zimbabwe’s current coalition government. Unreported World uncovered how profit from the diamonds is ending up in the pockets of numerous army officials in return for them ensuring Zanu-PF support at the up and coming elections next year.

So how is it that this is being allowed to continue by the Kimberley Process? Is it because the narrow wording of the Kimberley Process stops the murder, rape and displacement of workers and communities near to the Marange fields from being considered as serious as “war” or because they consider the Zimbabwean government to be a “legitimate government” despite Mugabe managing to bankrupt his country leaving millions starving, homeless and at risk from disease?

On the 17^th July 2010 the Kimberley Process reached an agreement over the Marange diamonds. In their press release following this decision the Kimberley Process and World Diamond Council stated that:  The press release goes on to say:

“According to the agreement, by September Zimbabwe will be able to carry out two supervised

exports of rough diamond from the Marange production. During this period, the Kimberley Process will conduct a review mission to Zimbabwe, which will be held in conjunction with the first visit to the country by the Kimberley Process Monitor…The Kimberley Process Monitoring Committee will review the report issued by the review mission to formulate a position regarding future exports.”

“ “If this is a victory for anyone, it is a victory for the Kimberly Process,” said KP Chair Boaz Hirsch. “The past several months have been difficult, but they have clearly demonstrated that not only does the Kimberley Process have teeth, it also is able to achieve results.” ”

Zimbabwe is attempting to legitimize their diamonds by using foreign mining companies within the fields. However, research into these companies (Anjin, Mbada and Canadile) reveals that key figures within the companies include people who are on United Nations black lists for human rights violations and who have links to Robert Mugabe’s Zanu-PF party.

It leaves us questioning why is the Kimberley Process happy to allow the trade in Zimbabwean diamonds when; 

• Influential members of the diamond industry such as the Rappaport Group warn against it?
• Or when on-going human rights violations are occurring despite the media glare?
• Or how there is no obvious improvement in Zimbabwean infrastructure despite a $30 million check for royalties being given to the country prior to the initial sale and the country is reputed to still have 4.5 million carats of diamonds left? (See Zimbabwe's Deputy Minister of Mines and Mining Development interview with Rough and Polished).  
• Or amongst the rumors of diamonds being sent to China in exchange for arms?

We are definitely left with more questions than answers but, overall, whilst we agree that, in theory, the Kimberley Process is a fantastic idea, the practice of it is doing more damage than good. Especially to the poor people of Zimbabwe.

That’s all for now….

Keeping ethics in the spotlight and increasing participation

The old adage that “All publicity is good publicity” is not always true especially with a subject as volatile and far reaching as Fair Trade, ethics and green issues. Everyone has an opinion ranging from the denial of global warming at one end of the scale to ethical fantasists at the other.

Within the fashion industry principles of sustainability and ethical standards are already rife and constantly growing, improving and becoming more accepted. So how do we bring the jewellery industry in line with our fashion counterparts? How do we keep pushing developments? And, for those of us who are already ethical in our work, how do we disclose this without sounding like we are patronising others for not being so?

Fashion and jewellery have developed side by side over many generations. The two have overlapped regularly never more so than when fashion jewellery emerged. This recent arm of the jewellery industry works in the same way as the fashion industry with styles, colours, shapes and designs changing on a seasonal basis. The Fine Jewellery sector of the market also follows this but at a less rapid speed.

The most necessary factor in shifting the jewellery industry towards being more ethical is a genuine interest in the issues concerned by those trying to change. Opulent Ethics believes that Companies who become ethical for the sole intention of attracting more customers are almost as bad as those who ignore the issues altogether.

There are always stories about the plight of the environment and the peoples involved in the jewellery industry supply chain. In recent years we have seen the spotlight focusing on the Blood Diamond film, the Marange Diamond Fields in Zimbabwe, Naomi Campbell’s involvement in the Blood Diamond trial of the ex-Liberian leader Charles Taylor, the campaign to save Alaska’s Bristol Bay from being mined…the list goes on and on.    

The story behind the Ethical Fashion Forum (EFF), a non-profit organisation, also rings true for the jewellery industry. The EFF started with a group of individuals and small companies who were concerned about the impact their business-actions had on others. From initial meetings came the idea to share and disseminate relevant information, to share supplier and manufacturer information and to help spread the word about what they were doing and why to the larger fashion community.

Today the EFF has over 3000 members in 73 countries all networking, sharing new developments and information and taking part in the numerous events and shows arranged by the forum. The EFF is also as successful as it is due to its collaborations with big names in the fashion world which attracts the attention of students and new designers as well as the world’s media.

There are already inklings of similar organisations within the ethical jewellery industry with the start of the Fair Jewellery Action website which has the on-going intention of combining the knowledge and experience of established ethical jewellers including Greg Valerio, Marc Choyt, Cred Jewellery and Ute Decker. Each of these founder members has far reaching contacts which should be encouraged to join the revolution and then, hopefully, an Ethical Jewellery Forum may begin.

Developments within jewellery are happening constantly but consistent consumer pressure may be what the industry needs to really make big steps toward change. A large percentage of the jewellery industry population don’t know or care about ethical issues but as bigger names are catching on and becoming involved this will change. There is so much family history within the industry with many companies set in their ways and following their heritage rather than forward thinking developments. This is going to be a challenge to change.

There are numerous companies which already produce jewellery in an ethical or sustainable way. Some choose to overtly publicise their ethical intentions (Oria, Leblas, Cred, Fifi Bijoux, Avasarah) whilst other make changes quietly without pushing their choices at their consumers (Ute Decker, Bario-Neal, Daisy Knights, Saretta).  

Opulent Ethics is unsure about which of these works best but knows that both are as important as the other and that we need more companies like this to keep making changes. And whichever way a designer decides to go, transparency has got to be the key. At this early stage of setting up ethics as a serious sector of the jewellery industry it is important for designers to be realistic in what they can achieve and practice what they say in order to ensure that ethics does not keep coming to the fore in a negative light.

Overall, the best thing that anyone can do is share their findings, suppliers and experiences either through their products and advertising or by becoming members of groups or wiki-sites such as the Fair Jewellery Action website. Also, be prepared to talk to those who ask about a piece of ethical jewellery being worn and the reasons for wearing it. You may find that you end up having the same conversation again and again but, yes another antonym is being used, baby steps are a good start point.

That’s it for now….