Why You Should Care about More Than Just “Conflict Minerals” in the Congo

Nov 28, 2016 | Carol Jean Gallo
View Original

Starting around the early 2000s, a global human rights advocacy movement was mobilized to raise awareness of how certain raw materials in electronics came from mines controlled by armed groups in eastern Congo. In the international press, the advocacy message often made a direct link between cell phones and violent atrocities in the DRC. The movement eventually led to the inclusion of section 1502 in the United States' Dodd-Frank Act. Since then, several academics and two independent filmmakers have added much needed nuance and complexity to the conversation on conflict minerals and the effects on the ground of section 1502. But human rights violations committed by armed groups are only part of the story. For cell phones to be truly ethical, at least in terms of DRC’s minerals, it is not just the famous tech companies that sell phones that need to be held accountable. International mining companies themselves are also responsible for the role they play in allowing grave human rights violations to be committed; and usually outside the context of armed conflict.