Two schools of thought are developing among members of the Kimberley Process over reported human rights abuses and alleged diamond smuggling in the Marange mining fields of Zimbabwe.
Although this should not put the future of the Kimberley Process in jeopardy, it poses a significant challenge for it and the way forward for a process, which, since 2003, has decreased the trade in conflict diamonds from an estimated 4%, to 0,2%, of blood diamonds.

World Federation of Diamond Bourses honorary life president Ernest Blom, who is also chairperson of the Diamond Dealers Club of South Africa, reports that one faction is calling for improved dialogue with Zimbabwe that would, hopefully, encourage the beleaguered country to accept help from other member States within the Kimberley Process facilitates its compliance with the Kimberley Process Certification Scheme once more.

The other faction is calling for the permanent suspension of Zimbabwe on the grounds that the country voluntarily suspended itself from the process in November last year and that it is still battling with compliance issues.

“The calls for Zimbabwe’s suspension from the Kimberley Process have been vociferous ever since the allegations of human rights abuses arose. Just after the reports surfaced, a monitor appointed by the Kimberley Process was appointed. This was after Zimbabwe voluntarily suspended itself,” says Blom.

 He adds that the only other country to voluntarily suspend itself from the process is Venezuela.

Blom feels that, although there are allegations of human rights abuses, Zimbabwe is still adhering to the guidelines of the Kimberley Process.

Zimbabwe’s Marange diamond fields stretch over 66 000 ha in the east of the country.

Although estimates of the reserves contained in this area vary significantly, some have gone so far as to suggest that it could host one of the world’s richest diamond deposits, albeit of a low quality.

EXTENDING REACH

According to the guidelines provided by the founding Kimberly Process document, in order for a country to be a participant of the Kimberley Process, it must ensure that any diamond originating from that country does not finance a rebel group or other entity seeking to overthrow a United Nations (UN)-recognised government; that every diamond export be accompanied by a Kimberley Process certificate; and that no diamond be imported from, or exported to, a nonmember of the scheme.

This three-step compliance guideline is a simple description of the steps taken to ensure a chain of warranties that deal exclusively with nonconflict diamonds.

If one looks at Zimbabwe and adherence to the guidelines of the Kimberley Process, one can see that the case for Zimbabwe’s suspension has its weaknesses.

“The main weakness is the Zimbabwean government is not a rebel movement and, to date, none of the capital gained from the alleged diamond smuggling has been used in a violent campaign against the Movement for Democratic Change,” says Blom.

The other two guidelines of the process are more contentious.

If there are human rights abuses in Zimbabwe, why are official Kimberley Process certificates being issued for the diamonds?

Why is Zimbabwe being allowed to smuggle diamonds into nonprocess member countries, such as Mozambique? And why are countries, such as South Africa and the United Arab Emirates – both members of the Kimberley Process – dealing in these diamonds?

“Currently, the guidelines regarding conflict do not cover human rights abuses. This is the main case in point for human rights groups at the moment.

Officially, these groups are putting pressure on the head of the Kimberley Process, which is currently Israel, to reword the guidelines to include human rights abuses,” says Blom.

Commenting on Zimbabwe’s compliance with the second and third guidelines, Blom reports that, officially, the Kimberley Process does not cover the diamonds being smuggled into Mozambique and South Africa.

“The Kimberley Process only governs diamonds mined by official mining houses that are registered with relevant governments. The diamonds that are being smuggled are being mined by illegal miners,” says Blom.

If the diamonds are, in fact, being mined by illegal miners who are independent of the syndicates, this casts doubt over the Global Witness report, which states that civilians found digging for diamonds independently of the syndicates were severely beaten or killed as a warning to others.

“What the human rights groups and nongovernmental organisations (NGOs) are lobbying for is that the Kimberley Process extend its reach to regulate human rights abuses not involved in an recog-nised conflict that is aimed at destabilising a UN-recognised government, and to regulate the illegal smuggling of diamonds being mined by illegal miners,” says Blom.

He adds that this would be difficult as the Kimberley Process is not a policing organ-isation and does not have sufficient capacity or jurisdiction to monitor this. Further, the question as to how these diamonds are getting official Kimberley Process certificates is still under debate.

A final criticism of the Kimberley Process is that it does not make a clear distinction between a conflict diamond and a blood diamond. In the case of Marange, although no conflict has occurred, blood has been spilled.

OFFICIAL LINE

At the annual meeting of the members of the Kimberley Process, held in Jerusalem at the end of June, the issue of Zimbabwe came under the spotlight.

At the meeting, World Diamond Council (WDC) president Eli Izhakoff said that the Kimberley Process’s human rights goal and the goal of its members were to ensure that the citizens of Zimbabwe were able to go about their lives without their basic rights being violated.

“It is for this reason that the WDC raised its voice to demonstrate against the recent detention by Zimbabwe authorities of NGO activists. This, clearly, was an uncalled-for and patently unjust attempt by the country’s government to suppress criticism. Such actions need to be condemned clearly and without equivocation,” said Izhakoff,

“The WDC issued its statement as an organisation concerned about both what is happening in Zimbabwe and the provision of basic human rights in diamond producing countries. The Kimberley Process will continue to pay dividends if it keeps its eyes on the ball and, in the case of Zimbabwe, that means monitoring carefully what is happening in Marange. The WDC will not rest until this diamond producing area is operating for the benefit of all the country’s citizens,” said Izhakoff.

CASTING DOUBTS

Certain NGO groups feel that the continued noncommittal stance that the members of the Kimberley Process have taken on the Zimbabwe issue is casting doubts over the effectiveness of the Kimberley Process and its future credence.

Blom acknowledges that problems within the Kimberley Process do exist but warns against its disbandment of the organisation.

“One needs to look at the reason for which the Kimberley Process was established. It was established as a mechanism to prevent the use of diamonds to fund conflicts that were affecting many innocent lives in Africa. One would shudder to think of the implications if the Kimberley Process no longer existed and a conflict arose,” says Blom.

Izhakoff also highlighted this point in Jerusalem.

“There are those who feel that the Kimberley Process is not fulfilling its mission or, possibly, that its mission is not properly defined. I do not for one moment suggest that the Kimberley Process is above criticism, nor that it cannot be improved. Indeed, I believe that there is much to be done. However, we should never overlook what has been achieved, nor should we underestimate how much skill was required to create this delicate coalition involving government, business and civil society, which, in the space of just a few years, managed to cut the percentage of conflict diamonds in the market to just a mere fraction of what it once was,” said Izhakoff.

Izhakoff added that the WDC was provided with a working document that outlined recommendations that the Kimberley Process could follow to resolve issues regarding its problems.

Firstly, it is seen as imperative that the administration of the Kimberley Process be strengthened by a professional staff that manages its everyday affairs. The current system relies on individuals to manage the process on a part-time basis.

Because the Kimberley Process chairpersonship is transferred annually from one member country to the next, it is important that a professional administration be kept in place, just as a civil service remains in place to keep the wheels turning, even when the elected government leadership changes.

Secondly, the WDC recommends that the current decision-making process of absolute consensus be amended to allow the body to vote more decisively, while still maintaining the greatest degree of harmony among participants. The council believes a two-thirds or 75% rule could provide a viable solution.

Thirdly, the WDC believes that the Kimberley Process should reform its rules on the publication of internal reports, with the goal being full transparency of all its actions and conclusions.