Martin Rapaport: “The World Diamond Council And The Kimberley Process Are a Sham.”
Martin Rapaport, is arguably the most important figure in the diamond sector, and a central figures in the fair trade jewelry movement and one of the key figures in the initiation of the Kimberley Certification Process (KP). La semaine dernière,, Rapaport resigned from the World Diamond Council , and gave the KP its most high profile vilification from an insider, calling it a “sham.”
(Martin Rapaport, center)
This follows on Ian Smillie’s denouncement of KP last year. Smillie is highly respected human rights advocate and academic involved with ethical diamond issues and development and small scale mining issues. Smillie has also been highly involved in the KP process.
The issue at stake are the diamond fields in Zimbabwe. In an impassioned article in Rapaport News, Rapaport writes, “Our industry is providing money and distribution to those who who murder, rape and enslave.”
Human Rights Watch reports, “Zimbabwe’s armed forces are engaging in the forced labor of children and adults, and are torturing and beating local villagers on the diamond fields of Marange district in eastern Zimbabwe.”
Maintenant, Zimbabwe blood diamonds are in the jewelry supply chain and being sold as KP certified and “conflict free.”
This announcement has literally shaken the diamond sector, most of which banks its reputation on the KP for the consumer.
Rapaport View Of How The RJC Falls Short
Rapaport and his media group have been leading up to this full blown denunciation for weeks and he has been highly critical of other members of the jewelry trade who have not taken appropriate action to stem the flow of blood diamonds. En Rapnet, which is Rapaport’s publication, Avi Krawitz points out that DeBeers and Rapaport have committed to not allowing blood diamonds from Marange to enter their supply chain, but the Responsible Jewellery Council has lagged behind in the issue.
The Responsible Jewellery Council represents the big boys club of the mainstream jewelry sector. Their new standards do not have the backing of civil society groups and many members of the ethical jewelry community.
“Where KP failed and the WDC neglected its mandate,” writes Krawitz, “the RJC this week could have saved face for the diamond industry. It’s now up to individual miners, diamantaires and jewelers to act on their own.”
Krawitz laments over the industry starting this decade with the taint of blood diamonds, much in the same way it did ten years ago. “The industry needs a vehicle to reflect and enact its own social conscience and awareness. What does it say about us if we allow ourselves to profit from the murder of hundreds of people and the suffering of communities? How do we answer when we are asked what we did to counter these abuses?”
Fairjewelry.org has for the last two years argued that KP is a shield that deceives the consumer and should never be a criteria for ethical sourcing. KP does not address human rights, labor or environmental issues. Anyone interested in ethically source diamonds, whether jewelers or consumers, must not rely upon KP. The issue is mine to market custody, which KP does not address sufficiently.
Rapaport is a controversial figure and is described as a maverick. Many people disagree strongly with Rapaport’s stance and some view his latest concerns as merely grandstanding. But we applaud Rapaport for once again using his influence to shake up the jewelry sector for the betterment of those who are most at risk in producer communities.
For a broad report on this issues from a jewelry trade perspective, check out Rob Bate’s Cutting Edge remark on his JCK blog:
http://www.jckonline.com/blog/Cutting_Remarks/30427-Martin_Rapaport_to_Resign_from_World_Diamond_Council.php
