Congo River

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Congo River
Location
Physical characteristics
Source	Lualaba River
- location	Boyoma Falls
Mouth	Atlantic Ocean
Length	4,700 km (2,900 mi)
Basin size	4,014,500 km2 (1,550,000 sq mi)
Discharge
- average	41,200 m3/s (1,450,000 cu ft/s)
- minimum	23,000 m3/s (810,000 cu ft/s)
- maximum	75,000 m3/s (2,600,000 cu ft/s)

The great Congo River is the second longest river in Africa, shorter only than the Nile, as well as the second largest river in the world by discharge volume, following only the Amazon. It is also the world's deepest recorded river, with measured depths in excess of 220 m (720 ft). The Congo-Lualaba-Chambeshi River system has an overall length of 4,700 km (2,920 mi), which makes it the world's ninth-longest river. The Chambeshi is a tributary of the Lualaba River, and Lualaba is the name of the Congo River upstream of Boyoma Falls, extending for 1,800 km (1,120 mi).

Measured along with the Lualaba, the main tributary, the Congo River has a total length of 4,370 km (2,715 mi). It is the only river to cross the equator twice. The Congo Basin has a total area of about 4,000,000 km² (1,500,000 sq mi), or 13% of the entire African landmass.

Name

The name Congo/Kongo river originates from the Kingdom of Kongo once located on the southern bank of the river. The kingdom in turn was named for the indigenous Bantu Kongo people, known in the 17th century as "Esikongo". South of the Kingdom of Kongo proper lay the similarly named Kakongo kingdom, mentioned in 1535. Abraham Ortelius in his world map of 1564 labeled as "Manicongo" the city at the mouth of the river.

The tribal names in Kongo possibly derive from a word for a public gathering or tribal assembly. The modern name of the Kongo people or Bakongo was introduced in the early 20th century.

The name Zaire is from a Portuguese adaptation of a Kikongo word, nzere ("river"), a truncation of nzadi o nzere ("river swallowing rivers"). The river was known as Zaire during the 16th and 17th centuries; Congo seems to have replaced Zaire gradually in English usage during the 18th century, and Congo is the preferred English name in 19th-century literature, although references to Zahir or Zaire as the name used by the inhabitants remained common.

The Democratic Republic of the Congo and the Republic of the Congo are named after it, as was the previous Republic of the Congo which had gained independence in 1960 from the Belgian Congo. 

The Republic of Zaire during 1971–1997 was also named after the river, after its name in French and Portuguese.

Basin and course

The Congo's drainage basin covers 4,014,500 square kilometres (1,550,000 sq mi), an area larger than India. The Congo's discharge at its mouth ranges from 23,000 to 75,000 cubic metres per second (810,000 to 2,650,000 cu ft/s), with an average of 41,000 cubic metres per second (1,400,000 cu ft/s).

The river and its tributaries flow through the Congo Rainforest, the second largest rain forest area in the world, second only to the Amazon Rainforest in South America. The river also has the second-largest flow in the world, behind the Amazon; the third-largest drainage basin of any river, behind the Amazon and Plate rivers; and is one of the deepest rivers in the world, at depths greater than 220 m (720 ft). Because its drainage basin includes areas both north and south of the equator, its flow is stable, as there is always at least one part of the river experiencing a rainy season.

The sources of the Congo are in the highlands and mountains of the East African Rift, as well as Lake Tanganyika and Lake Mweru, which feed the Lualaba River, which then becomes the Congo below Boyoma Falls. The Chambeshi River in Zambia is generally taken as the source of the Congo in line with the accepted practice worldwide of using the longest tributary, as with the Nile River.

The Congo flows generally toward the northwest from Kisangani just below the Boyoma falls, then gradually bends southwestwards, passing by Mbandaka, joining with the Ubangi River, and running into the Pool Malebo (Stanley Pool). Kinshasa (formerly Léopoldville) and Brazzaville are on opposite sides of the river at the Pool, where the river narrows and falls through a number of cataracts in deep canyons (collectively known as the Livingstone Falls), running by Matadi and Boma, and into the sea at the small town of Muanda. 

The Congo River Basin is one of the distinct physiographic sections of the larger Mid-African province, which in turn is part of the larger African massive physiographic division.

Tributaries to the great Congo river

Course and Drainage basin of the Congo River with countries marked

 

Course and Drainage basin of the Congo River with topography shading.

The drainage basin of the Congo River includes most of Central Africa. The main river and tributaries are:
 

Sorted in order from the mouth heading upstream.

 

Lower Congo (river mouth to Kinshasa)

Downstream of Kinshasa, from the river mouth at Banana, there are a few major tributaries, all on the left side.

• Mpozo
• Kwilu
• Inkisi

Middle Congo (Kinshasa to the Boyoma Falls)

• Kwa-Kassai (left) – 2150 km – 881,900 km², 9,900 m³/s
  • Fimi
    • Lukenie
  • Kwango
  • Sankuru
• Lefini (right)
• Sangha (right) – 1,400 km, 213,400 km², 750 m³/s
  • Kadéï
• Ubangi/ (right) – 2,270 km, 772,800 km², 4,000 m³/s
  • Mbomou
  • Uele
• Tshuapa or Ruki River (left) – 1,000 km
• Lomami River (left) – 1,400 km

Upper Congo (Upstream from the Boyoma Falls)

Upstream of Boyoma Falls near Kisangani, the river Congo is known as the Lualaba River.

• Luvua
  • Luapula
• Chambeshi

Economic importance

The town of Mbandaka is a busy port on the banks of the Congo River.

 

The Congo River at Maluku.

 

Although the Livingstone Falls prevent access from the sea, nearly the entire Congo above them is readily navigable in sections, especially between Kinshasa and Kisangani. Large river steamers worked the river until quite recently. The Congo River still is a lifeline in a land with few roads or railways.

Railways now bypass the three major falls, and much of the trade of Central Africa passes along the river, including copper, palm oil (as kernels), sugar, coffee, and cotton. The river is also potentially valuable for hydroelectric power, and the Inga Dams below Pool Malebo are first to exploit the Congo river.

Hydro-electric power

The Congo River is the most powerful river in Africa. During the rainy season over 50,000 cubic metres (1,800,000 cu ft) of water per second flow into the Atlantic Ocean. Opportunities for the Congo River and its tributaries to generate hydropower are therefore enormous. Scientists have calculated that the entire Congo Basin accounts for 13 percent of global hydropower potential. This would provide sufficient power for all of sub-Saharan Africa's electricity needs.

Currently there are about forty hydropower plants in the Congo Basin. The largest are the Inga dams, about 200 kilometres (120 mi) southwest of Kinshasa. The project was launched in the early 1970s, when the first dam was completed. The plan as originally conceived called for the construction of five dams that would have had a total generating capacity of 34,500 megawatts. To date only the Inga I and Inga II dams have been built, generating 1,776 MW.

In February 2005, South Africa's state-owned power company, Eskom, announced a proposal to expand generation through improvements and the construction of a new hydroelectric dam. The project would bring the maximum output of the facility to 40 gigawatts (54,000,000 hp), twice that of China's Three Gorges Dam.

It is feared that these new hydroelectric dams could lead to the extinction of many of the fish species that are native to the river.

Natural history

The beginning of the Livingstone Falls (Lower Congo Rapids) near Kinshasa

The current course of the Congo River formed 1.5–2 million years BP, during the Pleistocene.

The Congo's formation may have led to the allopatric speciation of the bonobo and the common chimpanzee from their most recent common ancestor. The bonobo is endemic to the humid forests in the region, as are other iconic species like the Allen's swamp monkey, dryas monkey, aquatic genet, okapi, and Congo peafowl.

In terms of aquatic life, the Congo River Basin has a very high species richness, and among the highest known concentrations of endemics. Until now, almost 700 fish species have been recorded from the Congo River Basin, and large sections remain virtually unstudied. This is by far the highest diversity of any African river system (in comparison, the next richest are the Niger, Volta and Nile with about 210, 140 and 130 fish species, respectively). Due to this and the great ecological differences between the regions in the Congo basin, it is often divided into multiple ecoregions (instead of treating it as a single ecoregion). Among these ecoregions, the Lower Congo Rapids alone has more than 300 fish species, including approximately 80 endemics while the southwestern part (Kasai Basin) alone has more than 200 fish species, of which about a quarter are endemic. The dominant fish families – at least in parts of the river – are Cyprinidae (carp/cyprinids, such as Labeo simpsoni), Mormyridae (elephantfishes), Alestidae (African tetras), Mochokidae (squeaker catfishes), and Cichlidae (cichlids). Among the natives in the river is the huge, highly carnivorous giant tigerfish. Three of the more unusual endemics are the whitish (non-pigmented) and blind Lamprologus lethops, which is believed to live as deep as 160 metres (520 ft) below the surface, Heterochromis multidens, which appears to be more closely related to cichlids of the Americas than other African cichlids, and Caecobarbus geertsii, the only known cavefish in Central Africa. There are also numerous endemic frogs and snails. Several hydroelectric dams are planned on the river, and these may lead to the extinction of many of the endemics.

Several species of turtles, and the slender-snouted, Nile and dwarf crocodile are native to the Congo River Basin. African manatees inhabit the lower parts of the river.

History

European Exploration

17th-century map of the Congo estuary

 

In this 1853 map of Africa, the remaining Unexplored Region essentially corresponds to the Congo basin

 

The entire Congo basin is populated by Bantu peoples, divided into several hundred ethnic or tribal groups. Bantu expansion is estimated to have reached the Middle Congo by about 500 BC, and the Upper Congo by the first century AD. Remnants of the aboriginal population displaced by the Bantu migration, Pygmies/Abatwa of the Ubangian phylum, remain in the remote forest areas of the Congo basin. 

The Kingdom of Kongo was formed around 1400 on the left banks of the lower Congo River. Its territorial control along the river remained limited to what corresponds to the modern Bas-Congo province. European exploration of the Congo begins in 1482, when Portuguese explorer Diogo Cão discovered the river estuary (likely in August 1482), which he marked by a Padrão, or stone pillar (still existing, but only in fragments) erected on Shark Point. Cão also sailed up the river for a short distance, establishing contact with the Kingdom of Congo. The full course of the river remained unknown throughout the early modern period.

The upper Congo basin runs west of the Albertine Rift. Its connection to the Congo was unknown until 1877. The extreme northeast of the Congo basin was reached by the Nilotic expansion at some point between the 15th and 18th centuries, by the ancestors of the Southern Luo speaking Alur people. Francisco de Lacerda following the Zambezi reached the uppermost part of the Congo basin (the Kazembe in the upper Luapula basin) in 1796. 

The upper Congo River, known as the Lualaba was first reached by the Arab slave trade by the 19th century. Nyangwe was founded as a slavers' outpost around 1860. David Livingstone was the first European to reach Nyangwe in March 1871. Livingstone proposed to prove that the Lualaba connected to the Nile, but on 15 July, he witnessed a massacre of about 400 Africans by Arab slavers in Nyangwe, which experience left him too horrified and shattered to continue his mission to find the sources of the Nile, so he turned back to Lake Tanganyika.

Henry M Stanley with the officers of the Advance Column, Cairo, 1890. From the left: Dr. Thomas Heazle Parke, Robert H. Nelson, Henry M. Stanley, William G. Stairs, and Arthur J. M. Jephson

 

The middle reaches of the Congo remained unexplored from either the east or west, until Henry Morton Stanley's expedition of 1876–77. At the time one of the last open questions of the exploration of Africa (or indeed of the world) whether the Lualaba River fed the Nile (Livingstone's theory), the Congo or even the Niger. Financed in 1874, Stanley's first trans-Africa exploration started in Zanzibar, and reached the Lualaba on October 17, 1876. Overland he reached Nyangwe, the centre of a lawless area containing cannibal tribes at which Tippu Tip based his trade in slaves. Stanley managed to hire a force from Tippu Tip, to guard him for the next 150 kilometres (90 mi) or so, for 90 days. The party left Nyangwe overland through the dense Matimba forest. On November 19 they reached the Lualaba again. Since the going through the forest was so heavy, Tippu Tip turned around with his party on December 28, leaving Stanley on his own, with 143 people, including 8 children and 16 women. They had 23 canoes. His first encounter with a local tribe was with the cannibal Wenya. In total Stanley would report 32 unfriendly meetings on the river, some violent, even though he attempted to negotiate a peaceful thoroughfare. But the tribes were wary as their only experience of outsiders was of slave traders. 

On January 6, 1877, after 640 kilometres (400 mi), they reached Boyoma Falls (called Stanley Falls for some time after), consisting of seven cataracts spanning 100 kilometres (60 mi) which they had to bypass overland. It took them to February 7 to reach the end of the falls. Here Stanley learned that the river was called Ikuta Yacongo, proving to him that he had reached the Congo, and that the Lualaba did not feed the Nile. 

From this point, the tribes were no longer cannibals, but possessed firearms, apparently as a result of Portuguese influence. Some four weeks and 1,900 kilometres (1,200 mi) later he reached Stanley Pool (now Pool Malebo), the site of the present day cities Kinshasa and Brazzaville. Further downstream were the Livingstone Falls, misnamed as Livingstone had never been on the Congo: a series of 32 falls and rapids with a fall of 270 metres (900 ft) over 350 kilometres (220 mi). On 15 March they started the descent of the falls, which took five months and cost numerous lives. From the Isangile Falls, five falls from the foot, they beached the canoes and Lady Alice and left the river, aiming for the Portuguese outpost of Boma via land. On August 3 they reached the hamlet Nsada. From there Stanley sent four men with letters forward to Boma, asking for food for his starving people. On August 7 relief came, being sent by representatives from the Liverpool trading firm Hatton & Cookson. On August 9 they reached Boma, 1,001 days since leaving Zanzibar on November 12, 1874. The party then consisted of 108 people, including three children born during the trip. Most probably (Stanley's own publications give inconsistent figures), he lost 132 people through disease, hunger, drowning, killing and desertion.

Kinshasa was founded as a trading post by Stanley in 1881 and named Léopoldville in honour of Leopold II of Belgium. The Congo basin was claimed by Leopold II as Congo Free State in 1885.

Congo River Allegory by Thomas Vinçotte.

Bridges in the Congo Basin

The Congo river basin is notable for the lack of bridges crossing the main rivers, although there are a number of ferries available for crossing the great Congo river and the major tributaries. The main reasoning is the mere width of the Congo river and main rivers, and the second is the lack of funds to set up permanent river crossings, this is however slowly changing to the better.

Bridges on the Congo proper and Lualaba

There are only two bridges on the Congo river proper and main tributaries, which both are found in the DR Congo:

• The Matadi Bridge, 148 km from the rivermouth, at the port of Matadi in the Kongo Central province.
• The Kongolo Bridge on the Lualaba River, some 3,900 km along the tributary from the rivermouth, near the town Kongolo, in the eastern province Katanga.

Bridges on the Uele and Kibali rivers

There is one bridge on the Uele River, and two on the Kibali River, which all lies in the northern province Haut-Uele of DR Congo:

• The Niangara Bridge on the Uele, some 2,000 km along the tributary from the rivermouth, near the town Niangara.
• The Dungu Bridge on the Kibali, some 2,050 km along the tributary from the rivermouth, near the town Dungu, at the confluence of Dungu and Kibali rivers, where the Uele river is formed.
• The Kalimva Bridge on the Kibali, some 2,250 km along the tributary from the rivermouth, near the town Kalimva.

Bridges on the Lulua river

There are at least four bridges on the Lulua river in the province of Kasai of DR Congo:

• Between the towns of Luebo and Tshimpumpu.
• Near the town of Kananga.
• At the town of Sanduwa.
• West of the town of Diongo (also the location of a railway bridge on the Benguela Railway).

Ferries in the Congo Basin

Ferries on the Congo proper

Lower Congo (Matadi - Pioka):

• Mafuambo - Kinganga, some 200 km from the mouth.
• Near Luozi, some 250 km from the mouth.

DR Congo - Congo Republic border:

• Kinshasa - Brazzaville, the ferry between the twin capitals - the most busy international ferry connection within Africa.

Upper Congo (Irebu - Ubundu):

• Near Isangi, some 1250 km from the mouth.
• At Kisangani, some 1500 km from the mouth.
• At Ubundu, some 1700 km from the mouth

Ferries on the Kasai River and tributaries

• Near Bandundu on the Kasai River.
• At Bandundu on the Kwango River.
• Near Bandundu on the Bunzili River.
• At Loange on the Loange River.

Ferry on the Ubangi river

• DR Congo - Central African Republic border:
  • Zongo - Bangui

Ferry on the Mbomou river

• DR Congo - Central African Republic border:
  • Ndu - Bangassou

Ferries on the Lulua river

• Near the township of Tshinkenke, in the province of Kasai in DR Congo.
• Near the township of Mpungu, in the province of Kasai in DR Congo.

Ferries on the Uele river

• Uele river crossing at Bondo.
• Uele river crossing at Malengoya.
• Uele river crossing at Bambili.

On the minor tributaries of the great Congo there are numerous river crossings, which cannot be included here.

Conflict resource

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Four common conflict minerals, clockwise from top left: coltan, cassiterite, gold ore, and wolframite.

 

Conflict resources are natural resources extracted in a conflict zone and sold to perpetuate the fighting. There is both statistical and anecdotal evidence that belligerent accessibility to precious commodities can prolong conflicts (a "resource curse"). The most prominent contemporary example has been the eastern provinces of the Democratic Republic of the Congo (DRC), where various armies, rebel groups, and outside actors have profited from mining while contributing to violence and exploitation during wars in the region. 

The four most commonly mined conflict minerals (known as 3TGs, from their initials) are cassiterite (for tin), wolframite (for tungsten), coltan (for tantalum), and gold ore, which are extracted from the eastern Congo, and passed through a variety of intermediaries before being purchased. These minerals are essential in the manufacture of a variety of devices, including consumer electronics such as mobile phones, laptops, and MP3 players.

The extraction and sale of blood diamonds, also known as "conflict diamonds", is a better-known phenomenon which occurs under virtually identical conditions. Even petroleum can be a conflict resource; ISIS used oil revenue to finance its military and terrorist activities. 

There have been international efforts to reduce trade in conflict resources, which try to reduce incentives to extract and fight over them. For example, in the United States, the 2010 Dodd–Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act required manufacturers to audit their supply chains and report use of conflict minerals. In 2015 a US federal appeals court struck down some aspects of the reporting requirements as a violation of corporations’ freedom of speech, but left others in place.

History

The concept of 'conflict resource', or 'conflict commodity' emerged in the late 1990s, initially in relation to the 'conflict diamonds' that were financing rebellions in Angola and Sierra Leone. (The media often called these 'blood diamonds'.) Then 'conflict timber' financed hostilities in Cambodia and Liberia.

Conventions

The concept was first officially discussed by the UN General Assembly in the context of 'conflict diamonds': The UN Security Council has since referred to conflict resources in several resolutions.

Global Witness has called for an international standardized definition to facilitate a more systematic application of UN resolutions, the prevention of complicity in abuses during hostilities by commercial entities exploiting or trading in conflict resources, and the prosecution of war profiteers suspected of supporting or abetting war criminals."

...natural resources whose systematic exploitation and trade in a context of conflict contribute to, benefit from or result in the commission of serious violations of human rights, violations of international humanitarian law or violations amounting to crimes under international law.

— Global Witness, proposed Definition of conflict resources

Since 1996 the Bonn International Center for Conversion has tracked resource governance and conflict intensity by country. Aside from fossil fuels, metals, diamonds, and timber it tracks the governance of other primary goods that might fund conflicts, including: poppy seeds and talc (Afghanistan), rubber (Côte d'Ivoire), cotton (Zambia), and cocoa (Indonesia).

Conflict minerals

The four most prominent conflict minerals, for example codified in the U.S. Conflict Minerals Law, are:

• Columbite-tantalite (or coltan, the colloquial African term) is the metal ore from which the element tantalum is extracted. Tantalum is used primarily for the production of tantalum capacitors, particularly for applications requiring high performance, a small compact format and high reliability, from hearing aids and pacemakers, to airbags, GPS, ignition systems and anti-lock braking systems in automobiles, through to laptop computers, mobile phones, video game consoles, video cameras and digital cameras. In its carbide form, tantalum possesses significant hardness and wear resistance properties. As a result, it is used in jet engine/turbine blades, drill bits, end mills and other tools.
• Cassiterite is the chief ore needed to produce tin, essential for the production of tin cans and the solder on the circuit boards of electronic equipment. Tin is also commonly a component of biocides, fungicides and as tetrabutyl tin/tetraoctyl tin, an intermediate in polyvinyl chloride (PVC) and high performance paint manufacturing.
• Wolframite is an important source of the element tungsten. Tungsten is a very dense metal and is frequently used for this property, such as in fishing weights, dart tips and golf club heads. Like tantalum carbide, tungsten carbide possesses hardness and wear resistance properties and is frequently used in applications like metalworking tools, drill bits and milling. Smaller amounts are used to substitute lead in "green ammunition". Minimal amounts are used in electronic devices, including the vibration mechanism of cell phones.
• Gold is used in jewelry, investments, electronics, and dental products. It is also present in some chemical compounds used in certain semiconductor manufacturing processes.

These are sometimes referred to as "the 3T's and gold", 3TG, or even simply the "3T's". Under the US Conflict Minerals Law, additional minerals may be added to this list in the future.

Democratic Republic of the Congo

As of 2010, the conflict resource fueling the world's deadliest war is gold in the Congo. Gold bars are less traceable than diamonds, and gold is abundant in the Kivu conflict region. In any case, no jewellery industry standard exists for verifying gold origination, as it does for diamonds (though jeweler's total outlay on gold is five times that on diamonds). Other conflict minerals being illicitly exported from the Congo include cobalt, tungsten, cassiterite, and coltan (which provides the tantalum for mobile phones, and is also said to be directly sustaining the conflict).

Armed conflict and mineral resource looting by the Congolese National Army and various armed rebel groups, including the Democratic Forces for the Liberation of Rwanda (FDLR) and the National Congress for the Defense of the People (CNDP), a proxy Rwandan militia group, has occurred throughout the late 20th century and the early 21st century. Additionally, the looting of the Congo's natural resources is not limited to domestic actors. During the Congo Wars (First Congo War (1996–1997) and Second Congo War (1998–2003)), Rwanda, Uganda and Burundi particularly profited from the Congo's resources. These governments continued to smuggle resources out of the Congo to this day.

The profits from the sale of these minerals have financed fighting in the Second Congo War and ongoing follow-on conflicts. Control of lucrative mines has also itself become a military objective.

Mines

Mines, in eastern Congo, are often located far from populated areas in remote and dangerous regions. A recent study by International Peace Information Service (IPIS) indicates that armed groups are present at more than 50% of mining sites. At many sites, armed groups illegally tax, extort, and coerce civilians to work. Miners, including children, work up to 48-hour shifts amidst mudslides and tunnel collapses that kill many. The groups are often affiliated with rebel groups, or with the Congolese National Army, but both use rape and violence to control the local population.

United States law

In April 2009, Senator Sam Brownback (R-KS) introduced the Congo Conflict Minerals Act of 2009 (S. 891) to require electronics companies to verify and disclose their sources of cassiterite, wolframite, and tantalum. This legislation died in committee. However, Brownback added similar language as Section 1502 of the Dodd–Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act, which passed Congress and was signed into law by President Barack Obama on July 21, 2010.

The U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) draft regulations to implement the Conflict Mineral Law, published in the Federal Register of December 23, 2010. would have required U.S. and certain foreign companies to report and make public their use of so-called "conflict minerals" from the Democratic Republic of the Congo or adjoining countries in their products. Comments on this proposal were extended until March 2, 2011. The comments on the proposal were reviewable by the public.

One report on the proposal stated the following statistics for the submitted comments:

• Slightly more than 700 comment letters were submitted to SEC on the proposal;
• Approximately 65% of those were form letters or basic letters from the general public supporting the rule's intent;
• The remaining 35% (roughly 270) represent views of businesses, trade/industry associations, the investment/financial community, professional auditing firms, and other relevant governmental entities; and
• Of those 270 comments, an estimated 200 contained substantive and/or technical comments.

That report also contained what it calls a "preview of the final SEC regulations" synthesized from their detailed research and analysis of a large body of documents, reports and other information on the law, proposed regulation and the current budget/political setting facing the SEC in the current administration. 

The final rule went into effect 13 November 2012.

The SEC rule did not go unnoticed by the international community, including entities seeking to undermine traceability efforts. A report published by a metals trading publication illustrated one DRC ore/mineral flow method that has apparently been devised to thwart detection.

On July 15, 2011, the US State Department issued a statement on the subject. Section 1502(c) of the Law mandates that the State Department work in conjunction with SEC on certain elements of conflict minerals policy development and support.

On October 23, 2012 U.S. State Dept Officials asserted that ultimately, it falls on the U.S. State Dept. to determine when this rule would no longer apply.

In April 2014, the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit struck down several parts of the SEC Rules as unconstitutional.

Auditing and reporting requirements

US Conflict Minerals Law contains two requirements that are closely connected:

• independent third party supply chain traceability audits
• reporting of audit information to the public and SEC.

Even companies not directly regulated by the SEC will be impacted by the audit requirements because they will be pushed down through entire supply chains, including privately held and foreign-owned companies. 

SEC estimated that 1,199 "issuers" (i.e., companies subject to filing other SEC reports) will be required to submit full conflict mineral reports. This estimate was developed by finding the amount of tantalum produced by the DRC in comparison to global production (15% – 20%). The Commission selected the higher figure of 20% and multiplied that by 6,000 (the total number of "issuers" SEC will be required to do initial product/process evaluations). This estimate does not account for the companies who supply materials to the "issuers" (but are not themselves SEC-regulated) but who will almost certainly be required to conduct conflict minerals audits to meet the demands of those customers. Other estimates indicate that the total number of US companies likely impacted may exceed 12,000.

A study of the potential impact of the regulation in early 2011 by the IPC – Association Connecting Electronic Industries trade association. was submitted with the association's comments to the SEC. The study states that the IPC survey respondents had a median of 163 direct suppliers. Applying that number to the SEC's estimated number of impacted issuers results in the possibility of over 195,000 businesses that could be subject to some level of supply chain traceability effort.

Applicability in general

Under the law, companies have to submit an annual conflict minerals report to the SEC if:

• (a) they are required to file reports with the SEC under the Exchange Act of 1934
• (b) conflict minerals are necessary to the functionality or production of a product that they manufacture or contract to be manufactured. That statement contains two separate – but critical concepts: the purpose of the conflict mineral in the product/process, and the control that the company exerts over the manufacturing process/specifications.

A company would be deemed to contract an item to be manufactured if it:

• Exerts any influence over the manufacturing process; or,
• Offers a generic product under its own brand name or a separate brand name (regardless of whether the company has any influence over the manufacturing process) and the company contracted to have the product manufactured specifically for itself.

This language implied that some retailers who are not manufacturers might be subject to the audit and disclosure requirements.

"Contracting to manufacture" a product requires some actual influence over the manufacturing of process that product, a determination based on facts and circumstances. A company is not to be deemed to have influence over the manufacturing process if it merely:

• Affixes its brand, marks, logo, or label to a generic product manufactured by a third party.
• Services, maintains, or repairs a product manufactured by a third party.
• Specifies or negotiates contractual terms with a manufacturer that do not directly relate to the manufacturing of the product.

The proposed regulations attempted to clarify that tools used in assembly and manufacturing will not trigger the law. The intent was to cover minerals/metals in the final product only. Nothing specifically addresses intermediate chemical processes that use chemicals that contain conflict minerals. Additionally, neither the law nor the proposed regulation established a de minimis quantity or other form of materiality threshold that would preclude the applicability of the auditing/reporting requirements.

Supply chain traceability auditing

The law mandates the use of an "independent private sector auditor" to conduct the audits. SEC has proposed two different standards for the audits: the "reasonable inquiry" and the "due diligence". Should the final rule include this structure, the reasonable inquiry would be the first step to determine if the company can on its own, using reasonable efforts and trustworthy information, make a reliable determination as to the source/origin of its tin, tantalum, tungsten and/or gold. Where companies are unable to make such a determination for any reason, they would then be required to take the next step of the "due diligence", which is the independent private sector audit. 

The statute specified that the audits be "conducted in accordance with standards established by the Comptroller General of the United States, in accordance with rules promulgated by the Commission." This means that the same auditing standards that apply to other SEC auditing requirements will apply to conflict minerals audits  Because of this language, SEC will have little discretion to allow companies to issue self-generated statements or certifications to satisfy the law. 

Third party audits for conflict minerals supply chain traceability began in summer 2010 under the Electronic Industry Citizenship Coalition (EICC), a US-based electronics manufacturing trade association. Under this program, EICC selected three audit firms to conduct the actual audits, with two of the three participating in the pilot audits in 2010. After concluding the pilot, one of the two firms involved in 2010 withdrew from the program specifically in response to the SEC's proposal and to reduce potential legal risks to the audited entities.

Neither the law nor the proposed regulations provide guidance on what will be considered an acceptable audit scope or process, preferring to allow companies the flexibility meeting the requirement in a manner that is responsive to their own individual business and supply chain. At the same time, the law contains a provision that preserves the government's rights to deem any report, audit or other due diligence processes as being unreliable, and in such cases, the report shall not satisfy the requirements of the regulations, further emphasizing the need for such audits to conform to established SEC auditing standards. Comments on the proposed regulation pointed out that, should SEC not specify an applicable audit standard, it cannot also be silent or ambiguous on the auditor standards as well, or the Commission will violate the plain language of the Law mandating "standards established by the Comptroller General of the United States". It is generally expected that SEC will provide specificity on both the audit standard and the auditor standard. SEC's proposal attempted to clarify its position on auditor requirements.

The Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) published its Guidance on conflict minerals supply chain traceability. This guidance is gaining much momentum as "the" standard within US policy. However, a recent critical analysis of the standard in comparison to existing US auditing standards under SEC highlighted a number of significant inconsistencies and conflict with relevant US standards. Companies subject to the US law who implement the OECD Guidance without regard for the SEC auditing standards may face legal compliance risks.

Reporting and disclosure

Companies subject to the SEC reporting requirement would be required to disclose whether the minerals used in their products originated in the DRC or adjoining countries (as defined above). The law mandates that this reporting be submitted/made available annually. Many comments to the proposed regulation asked SEC to clarify whether the report must be "furnished"—meaning it is made available to SEC but not directly incorporated within the company's formal financial report—or "submitted"—meaning the report is directly incorporated into the financial report. At first glance, this may appear to be a minor point; however, this difference is very important in determining the audit/auditor standards and related liabilities.

If it is determined that none of the minerals originated in the DRC or adjoining countries, the report must include a statement to that effect and provide an explanation of the country of origin analysis that was used to arrive at the ultimate conclusion. On the other hand, if conflict minerals originating in the DRC or adjoining countries were used (or if it is not possible to determine the country of origin of the conflict minerals used), companies would be required to state as such in the annual report. In either case, companies would also be required to make this information public by posting their annual conflict minerals report on their websites, and providing the SEC with the internet addresses where the reports may be found. Further, the proposed regulations would require companies to maintain records relating to the country of origin of conflict minerals used in their products.

Media outlets have reported that many companies required to file Specialized Disclosure Reports to the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) and any necessary conflict minerals reports for 2013 under the SEC’s conflict minerals rule are struggling to meet the June 2, 2014 report filing deadline. Many impacted companies were hoping for clarification regarding filing requirements, from the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit from a lawsuit filed by the National Association of Manufacturers. The appellate court’s ruling left the necessary conflict minerals reporting requirements largely intact and it has been suggested that impacted companies should review the SEC’s Division of Corporation Finance’s response to the court’s ruling which provides guidance regarding the effect of the appellate court’s ruling.

On August 18, 2015 the divided D.C. Circuit Court again held the SEC's conflict materials rule violates the First Amendment. Senior Circuit Judge A. Raymond Randolph, joined by Senior Circuit Judge David B. Sentelle, weighed if the required disclosures were effective and uncontroversial. Citing news reports and a Congressional hearing, the court decided the policy was ineffective. The court next found the required label was controversial because it "is a metaphor that conveys moral responsibility for the Congo war." As such, the court struck down the conflict materials rule’s disclosure requirements as a violation of corporations’ freedom of speech. Circuit Judge Sri Srinivasan dissented, writing that the required disclosures were not controversial because they were truthful.

Criticism of the law

The law has been criticised for not addressing the root causes of the conflict, leaving to the Congolese government the responsibility for providing an environment in which companies can practice due diligence and legitimately purchase the minerals they need, when the reality is that mechanisms for transparency do not exist. The effect has been to halt legitimate mining ventures that provided livelihoods for people, reducing the Congo's legal exports of tantalum by 90%.

An investigation by the U.S. Government Accountability Office (GAO) found that most companies were unable to determine the source of their conflict minerals.

Technology manufacturers criticized a law which required them to label a product as not "DRC Conflict Free" as compelled speech, and in violation of the First Amendment.

Proposed law in Europe

The European Parliament passed legislation in 2015; negotiations are currently underway among member states as to specific wording details.

On 16 June 2016 the European Parliament confirmed that "mandatory due diligence" would be required for "all but the smallest EU firms importing tin, tungsten, tantalum, gold and their ores".

On May 17, 2017 the EU passed Regulation (EU) 2017/821 of the Parliament and of the Council on the supply chain due diligence obligations for importers of tin, tantalum, tungsten, their ores, and gold from conflict-affected and high risk areas. The regulation will take effect in January 2021, and will directly apply to companies that import 3TG metals into the EU, no matter where they originate.

On August 10, 2018 The European Commission published their non-binding guidelines for the identification of conflict-affected and high-risk areas and other supply chain risks under Regulation (EU) 2017/821 of the European Parliament and of the Council.

Conflict resources in supply chains

Increases in business process outsourcing to globally dispersed production facilities means that social problems and human rights violations are no longer only an organization matter, but also often occur in companies’ supply chains, and challenge for supply chain managers. Besides the harm conflict minerals do where they are produced, human rights violations also raise an enormous risk to corporate reputations. Consumers, mass media and employees expect companies to behave responsibly and have become intolerant of those who don't. 

Consequently, firms that are located downstream in the supply chain and that are more visible to stakeholders are particularly threatened by social supply chain problems. The recent debate concerning conflict minerals illustrates the importance of social and human rights issues in supply chain management practice as well as the emerging need to react to social conflicts. Conflict minerals are processed in many different components throughout various industries and hence have a high overall impact on business. 

Initiatives like the Dodd–Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act or the OECD Due Diligence Guidance for Responsible Supply Chains of Minerals from Conflict-Affected and High-Risk Areas demand that supply chain managers verify purchased goods as ‘‘conflict-free’’ or implement measures to better manage any inability to do so.

Minerals mined in Eastern Congo pass through the hands of numerous middlemen as they are shipped out of Congo, through neighboring countries such as Rwanda or Burundi, to East Asian processing plants. Because of this, the US Conflict Minerals Law applies to materials originating (or claimed to originate) from the DRC as well as the nine adjoining countries: Angola, Burundi, Central African Republic, Congo Republic, Rwanda, South Sudan, Zimbabwe, Uganda, and Zambia.

Firms have begun to apply governance mechanisms to avoid adverse effects of conflict mineral sourcing. However, the mere transfer of responsibilities upstream in the supply chain apparently will not stop the trade with conflict minerals, notably due to two reasons:

• On the one hand, globalization has created governance gaps in a sense that companies are able to abuse human rights without being sanctioned by independent third parties. This gap results in a non-allocation of responsibility that makes the problem of human rights abuses and social conflicts within dispersed supply chains very likely to endure, particularly without collaborative approaches to remedy these deficiencies.
• On the other hand, conflict minerals usually originate from globally diverse deposits and are difficult to track within components and manufactured products. This is the case because they are mixed with minerals of different origin and added to metal alloys. Consequently, although the share of these minerals in single end products may be negligible, they are prevalent in numerous products and commodities. Together, these circumstances leave downstream firms nearly incapable of detecting risks associated with conflict minerals. Hence, the topic of conflict minerals becomes one of supply chain management rather than of individual companies’ legal or compliance divisions alone. What is needed is effective and supply-chain wide-mechanisms of traceability and due diligence that allow firms to take individual and collective responsibility as parts of supply chains.

In the context of mineral supply chains, due diligence represents a holistic concept that aims at providing a chain of custody tracking from mine to export at country level, regional tracking of mineral flows through the creation of a database on their purchases, independent audits on all actors in the supply chain, and a monitoring of the whole mineral chain by a mineral chain auditor. In this sense, due diligence transcends conventional risk management approaches that usually focus on the prevention of direct impacts on the core business activities of companies. Moreover, due diligence focuses on a maximum of transparency as an end itself while risk management is always directed towards the end of averting direct damages. However, besides the Dodd–Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act and the OECD Guidance, there is still a gap in due diligence practices as international norms are just emerging. Studies found that the motivation for supply chain due diligence as well as expected outcomes of these processes vary among firms. Furthermore, different barriers, drivers, and implementation patterns of supply chain due diligence have been identified in scholarly research.

Organizations and activists involved

A number of organizations and celebrities working to find solutions and raise awareness of conflict minerals. These include:

• Save the Congo
• The Enough Project
• Partnership Africa Canada
• The Conflict Free Tin Initiative
• Solutions for Hope
• Raise Hope for Congo
• Stand Canada
• Conflictminerals.org
• Congo Siasa
• ReliefWeb
• Ashley Judd
• Ryan Gosling
• Southern Africa Resource Watch

Moreover, FairPhone Foundation raises awareness of conflict minerals in the mobile industry and is a company which tries to produce a smart phone with 'fair' conditions along the supply chain. Various industry and trade associations are also monitoring developments in conflict minerals laws and traceability frameworks. Some of these represent electronics, retailers, jewelry, mining, electronics components, and general manufacturing sectors. One organization – ITRI (a UK-based international non-profit organization representing the tin industry and sponsored/supported by its members, principally miners and smelters.) had spearheaded efforts for the development and implementation of a "bag and tag" scheme at the mine as a key element of credible traceability. The program and related efforts were initially not likely to extend beyond the pilot phase due to a variety of implementation and funding problems that occurred. In the end however, the device did enter the market.

In late March 2011, the UK government launched an informational section on its Foreign & Commonwealth Office website dedicated to conflict minerals. This information resource is intended to assist British companies in understanding the issues and, specifically, the US requirements. 

On Jan 6th 2014, the semiconductor giant Intel announced that it would distance itself from conflict minerals. As a result, all Intel microprocessors henceforth will be conflict-free.

Commercial reporting solutions

Manufacturers and supply chain partners needing to comply with the ever-increasing reporting regulations have a few commercial options available. 

A major research report from November 2012 by the Southern Africa Resource Watch revealed that gold miners in the east of the Democratic Republic of Congo were being exploited by corrupt government officials, bureaucrats and security personnel, who all demand illegal tax, fees and levies from the miners without delivering any services in return. Despite the alleged gold rush in regions of the country, none of the population and workforce is benefiting from this highly lucrative industry.