The Democratic Republic of the Congo (DRC) has initiated legal proceedings against Apple’s subsidiaries in France and Belgium, alleging the tech giant’s complicity in the use of “conflict minerals” within its supply chains. The DRC accuses Apple of deceptive commercial practices, portraying a clean supply chain while sourcing minerals from conflict-ridden regions of sub-Saharan Africa. The lawsuit centers around the so-called 3TG minerals – tin, tantalum, and tungsten – along with gold, materials integral to the production of various electronic devices. The DRC’s eastern region, rich in these minerals, has endured decades of violent conflict, with over 200 armed groups vying for control of the lucrative mines. This exploitation fuels the ongoing conflict, providing revenue streams for these groups to acquire weaponry and perpetuate violence.
Conflict minerals, as defined by the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD), are extracted from conflict-affected and high-risk areas. These minerals are not inherently problematic; the issue lies in their origin and the human cost associated with their extraction. The DRC, Sierra Leone, and Venezuela are prominent examples of countries where conflict minerals are sourced. The trade in these minerals often finances armed groups, exacerbating conflict and human rights abuses in already volatile regions. Tantalum is utilized in capacitors for electronic devices and jet engines, tin finds its way into automobile parts and food packaging, tungsten is crucial for automobiles, cutting tools, and light bulbs, while gold is used in jewelry and electronics. The harsh working conditions in these mines often involve forced labor, slavery, and other exploitative practices, adding another layer of ethical concern to the issue.
The DRC government alleges that Apple, despite its claims of a clean supply chain, benefits from the illicit trade of these conflict minerals. They contend that armed groups, such as the Rwandan-backed M23, control significant portions of the mineral trade, profiting immensely from the extraction and export of these resources. The M23, for instance, reportedly controls coltan production in the Rubaya region, a major source of tantalum, a key component in electronics manufacturing. The profits generated from coltan exports, estimated between $39 and $43 per kilo, empower these groups to acquire weapons and prolong the conflict, according to the Rwandan central bank’s figures. The DRC’s legal team argues that Apple’s sourcing practices, despite claims of due diligence, indirectly finance these armed groups, perpetuating violence and human rights abuses in the region.
The legal action follows an investigation initiated by DRC President Felix Tshisekedi in September 2023. Lawyers from Amsterdam & Partners LLP were tasked with scrutinizing the supply chains of 3TG minerals originating from the DRC. Their findings led to contact with Apple CEO Tim Cook in April 2024, raising concerns about the potential taint of Apple’s supply chain with “blood minerals.” Apple’s initial response denied any reasonable basis for these claims, asserting their due diligence in ensuring their suppliers did not directly or indirectly finance armed groups. However, the DRC’s legal team remained unconvinced and filed criminal complaints against Apple’s European branches in December 2024, escalating the legal battle.
While Apple maintains its denial of the allegations, the company has acknowledged the escalating conflict in the region and announced a suspension of sourcing 3TG minerals from the DRC and Rwanda. They cite concerns about the feasibility of independent audits and industry certifications amid the intensified conflict. Apple emphasizes its commitment to recycled materials and high sourcing standards. However, the DRC’s legal team, while acknowledging Apple’s statement as “satisfactory,” insists on on-the-ground verification. The lawyers are determined to pursue the case in European courts, emphasizing the public interest in scrutinizing international supply chains and holding corporations accountable for their sourcing practices.
The case unfolds within the context of the EU’s regulations regarding the import of 3TG minerals. These regulations aim to uphold responsible sourcing standards set by the OECD, ensuring that global and EU smelters and refiners operate ethically. The overarching goal is to sever the link between conflict and the illegal exploitation of minerals, protecting local communities and workers. The DRC’s legal team has also appealed to the European Commission President, urging action against armed violence connected to mineral supply chains in sub-Saharan Africa. This case is not isolated. Global Witness, an NGO, has identified other international brands, including Intel, Samsung, Nokia, Motorola, and Tesla, with potential links to conflict minerals. They highlight the inadequacy of mitigation measures implemented by these companies despite awareness of the issue. The OECD has established a five-step framework for responsible sourcing, which includes transparency, risk assessment, third-party audits, and public reporting. The US Dodd-Frank Act also mandates disclosure reports for companies using conflict minerals. The DRC government, alongside international pressure, is advocating for stricter control over mineral trade and action against groups fueling the conflict.
