Day 1: Counting the days to actual responses from corporates to the #Dorsen question. Nokia gets points by interacting and liking a tweet. Also: notes on international law

Please show your support for Dorsen

Gold star for Nokia. Dorsen’s day. International law

No judgement here. The paper letters are in the post and will still be in postal bags somewhere. It will take a while for them to be delivered to offices in:

China [Huayou Cobalt and Lenovo], Korea [Samsung and LG Electronics], Taiwan [Acer Inc.], Japan [Sony], Sweden [Doro],  France [Archos], Germany [Volkswagon], Finland [Nokia], Canada [Blackberry], USA [Apple, Google, Microsoft], Finland [Nokia]. The CEO office for Vodafone in Newbury, England, should have received their letter, though.

A star goes to Nokia. So far, Nokia is the only company who has had the courtesy and courage to interact with @MeetDorsen on Twitter.  Thank you, Nokia.

Other companies to write to are:

Dell, HP Inc., Huawei, Daimler AG and BYD in China.

I’ll also be tweeting at companies and posting on their Facebook pages to alert them to this letter.

Context: Dorsen

Reminding people that, today, Dorsen and Richard, and an estimated 40k children toiled in DR Congo cobalt mines. Dorsen, after a 12 hour day, would have earned as little as 8p / 10¢ … or nothing… Dorsen may, or may not eat today. Dorsen may or may not be safe today. 

If companies had added 10p to every unit sold and set it aside for these children –  how much would that have raised today? As a consequence, how many children would eat today? How many would go to school today?  How many shoes would be put on feet today? How many cobalt children might find this so wonderful they would actually smile today?

Reminding people of what international law says

The Amnesty International Report:
This is what we die for

Published January 2016

Excerpts:

COMPANIES’ FAILURE TO MEET INTERNATIONAL DUE DILIGENCE STANDARDS

 

Any company which sources processed ore, and its customers along the supply chain, referred to as “downstream” companies, should be able to trace its suppliers up to the smelters (such as CDM and Huayou Cobalt), and should be fully aware of the due diligence practices of the smelter company. In their letters to Amnesty International, most of these downstream companies referred to general codes of conduct and internal policies, which require suppliers to respect human rights and not employ children. Many of these companies stated that they have a zero tolerance policy when it comes to child labour in their supply chains. However, they did not provide details of specific investigations and checks that they have undertaken to identify and address child labour in their cobalt supply chains. None of the companies said that they had been in touch with Huayou Cobalt, prior to receiving our letter.

Many companies denied sourcing cobalt from the DRC and/or Huayou Cobalt – though they are listed as customers in documents of other companies who are listed as buying from Huayou Cobalt – but did not explain whom they sourced cobalt from. Con­sidering the predominance of cobalt from the DRC in the global market, it is unlikely that all these large companies are not sourcing any cobalt from the DRC. Downstream companies should already be publicly disclosing who their smelters are, as well as their due diligence practices. However, none provided enough detail for Amnesty International to be able to verify their cobalt supply chain or whether they were undertaking all five steps of the OECD Guidance in relation to cobalt.

Under international human rights law, states have a duty to protect against human rights abuses by all actors, including businesses. This requires all governments to enact and enforce laws requiring corporate due diligence and public disclosure in relation to cobalt and other minerals.

Companies in the cobalt supply chain should undertake and publicly disclose their due diligence practices. Companies also have a responsibility to undertake remedial action if human rights abuses have occurred at any point in an existing or past supply chain. The company must, in cooperation with other relevant actors, such as its suppliers and national authorities, remediate the harm suffered by people whose human rights have been abused.

Link to full report >

 

Be the first to comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.


*