What will be the impact on global mineral supply chain regulations due to DRC's actions by end of 2025?
Significant New Regulations • 25%
Minor Adjustments • 25%
No Changes • 25%
Regulations Relaxed • 25%
New legislation or international agreements reported by governments or international bodies
Congo Accuses Apple Subsidiaries of War Crimes and Deceptive Practices Over Conflict Minerals
Dec 17, 2024, 08:38 AM
The Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC) has filed criminal complaints against Apple subsidiaries in France and Belgium, namely Apple France, Apple Retail France, and Apple Retail Belgium, accusing the tech giant of using conflict minerals in its supply chain. These minerals, including tin, tantalum, and tungsten (3T minerals), are sourced from conflict-ridden regions in the DRC where armed groups fund violence through illegal mining. The complaints allege that Apple benefits from minerals laundered through international supply chains, making the company complicit in war crimes, laundering of tainted minerals, and deceptive commercial practices. Apple maintains that it does not directly source raw minerals and conducts audits to ensure its supply chain does not finance armed groups. However, Congo's lawyers argue that Apple's reliance on the ITSCI monitoring scheme, which has been discredited for inadequate traceability by the Responsible Minerals Initiative (RMI), allows the company to falsely present its supply chain as clean. The legal action highlights the ongoing conflict in eastern Congo, fueled by competition for mineral resources, and marks the first time the Congolese state has directly targeted a major tech company in court. Belgium's colonial past and Rwanda's involvement in the conflict are also cited as reasons for the complaints.
View original story
Mixed outcomes • 25%
Improved transparency • 25%
No significant change • 25%
Worsened transparency • 25%
Other countries • 25%
Germany • 25%
China • 25%
United States • 25%
Minimal disruption • 25%
Severe disruption • 25%
Moderate disruption • 25%
No disruption • 25%
Publicly deny allegations • 25%
Increase transparency reports • 25%
No significant action • 25%
Implement stricter supply chain audits • 25%
Law postponed • 25%
Law enforced with exemptions • 25%
Law enforced with penalties • 25%
Law repealed • 25%
Negative response • 25%
Mixed response • 25%
Neutral response • 25%
Positive response • 25%
Moderate decrease in gold exports • 25%
No significant change • 25%
Increase in gold exports despite sanctions • 25%
Significant decrease in gold exports • 25%
Funds recovered • 25%
Arrests made • 25%
No significant outcome • 25%
Both arrests and funds recovered • 25%
Former Gecamines executives • 25%
No individual held responsible • 25%
Government officials • 25%
Current Gecamines executives • 25%
Other • 25%
United States • 25%
China • 25%
European Union • 25%
No • 50%
Yes • 50%
No • 50%
Yes • 50%
Yes • 50%
No • 50%
Case Dismissed • 25%
Settlement • 25%
Guilty • 25%
Not Guilty • 25%