Cotton Campaign
  • About
    • Who We Are
    • Uzbekistan's Forced Labor Problem >
      • Reports
      • Chronicle of Forced Labor
      • Photos/Video
      • FAQs
    • Turkmenistan's Forced Labor Problem >
      • Reports of Forced Labor in Turkmenistan's Cotton Sector
    • Forced Labor Cotton in Other Countries
    • Contact
  • Countries
    • Turkmenistan
    • Uzbekistan
    • Governments >
      • What other governments can do
    • International Organizations >
      • What the World Bank and Asian Development Bank can do
      • What the International Labor Organization can do
    • Companies >
      • What companies operating in Uzbekistan or Turkmenistan can do
      • What companies that use cotton can do
      • What investors can do
  • Take Action
  • Media
    • Press Releases
    • News
    • Videos
  • Blog

Blog

Switzerland, UK Accept NGO Complaint Against EU Companies Profiting from Uzbek Child Labor

3/29/2011

0 Comments

 
Activists hoping to bring EU cotton traders to account for their possible relationship to forced child labor in Uzbekistan have begun to see the fruits of its efforts.

This week, Switzerland joined the United Kingdom in accepting the complaints filed by the European Center for Constitutional and Human Rights (ECCHR) in Germany to the Organisation for Economic Co-Cooperation and Development (OECD). The OECD, a 33-member body promoting economic sustainability, maintains guidelines for corporations that include human rights, specifically labor conditions.

ECCHR, joined by partner organizations Uzbek-German Forum for Human Rights of Germany, Guido Ehrler of Switzerland and Sherpa of France filed complaints to the OECD last October, citing seven companies doing business in the EU member states of Switzerland, France, Germany, and the United Kingdom. Their contention was that EU cotton traders were profiting from forced child labor, widely documented as a systematic practice in Uzbekistan

While the acceptance by the UK and Swiss National Contact Points (NCPs) for the OECD don't constitute an admission that the companies cited are in fact benefiting from child exploitation in Uzbekistan, it does mean that half the battle is won in getting companies to look more closely at their partners and supply chains.

Most importantly, the companies counter-claim -- that they didn't have sufficient relationship to the Uzbek sources to be the subject of a complaint -- has been thrown out by both the UK and Swiss NCPs, i.e. the contact points within those governments who look at  OECD issues.

What follows now is a mediation process where ECCHR will present their findings and discuss a resolution with the companies. Because it's a confidential process, ECCHR is not commenting now on their arguments, or speculating on the possible outcome.

Yet a powerful argument has already been made in the ECCHR complaint itself, drawing on the work of a number of groups like the Uzbek German Forum for Human Rights which has been documenting the widespread and frequent use of children in the fields, taking them from homes and schools. ECCHR maintains that EU companies benefit from this abuse of children, which is a violation of Uzbekistan's commitments under the International Labour Organisation (ILO) conventions. And now European governments are starting to accept the proposition that they must take seriously the possibility of their complicity in this practice.

For example, the assessment of the complaint filed on Cargill published on the British government's website now, states:

a) That Cargill may buy cotton from Uzprommashimpeks, one of three companies controlled by the Government of Uzbekistan which sell to international buyers the cotton produced in Uzbekistan. The ECCHR further submitted that: Cargill has a branch office in Tashkent (Uzbekistan) which specialises in buying cotton; that Cargill lists central Asia as one of its key cotton suppliers; and that Cargill participated at the 5th Tashkent Cotton Fair on 14-15 October 2009;

b) That Cargill, in view of its relationship with the Government of Uzbekistan outlined in paragraph 3(a) above, is in a position to influence, either alone or as part of international groups (such as the Bremen Cotton Exchange or the International Cotton Advisory Committee (ICAC)), the Uzbek authorities regarding their use of forced and child labour. The ECCHR further alleged that Cargill chose not to join an international group of cotton (and cotton products) retailers boycotting the use of cotton produced in Uzbekistan;

c) That the cotton bought by Cargill in Uzbekistan is produced through the systematic use of child and forced labour supported by the Government of Uzbekistan, which in turn negatively affects the sustainable development of the region;

In the summary of its decision, the UK NCP upheld the right to discuss the issue in these terms, although not (yet) the findings. Cargill argued that the complaint should be rejected due to a lack of an "investment nexus" between Cargill Cotton and Uzbekistan, or between Cargill Cotton and the companies owned by the government of Uzbekistan.

But the UK NCP said the issues "merit further consideration" -- while not stating that the UK NCP considers Cargill to have violated OECD guidelines.

Germany's response to the complaint is expected at the end of April, which would mean a total of three EU countries indicated and still a fourth -- France -- to be heard from.

The ECCHR complaint process is a form of "soft law," and involves using an international organization's non-binding guidelines and complaint procedures in an adversarial fashion so as to get companies voluntarily to abide by the labor rights in the guidelines.

0 Comments



Leave a Reply.

    Archives

    February 2020
    January 2019
    September 2018
    August 2018
    June 2017
    September 2016
    August 2016
    July 2016
    June 2016
    May 2016
    April 2016
    March 2016
    February 2016
    January 2016
    December 2015
    November 2015
    October 2015
    September 2015
    August 2015
    July 2015
    June 2015
    April 2015
    March 2015
    February 2015
    January 2015
    December 2014
    November 2014
    October 2014
    August 2014
    June 2014
    May 2014
    April 2014
    March 2014
    February 2014
    January 2014
    December 2013
    November 2013
    October 2013
    September 2013
    August 2013
    June 2013
    April 2013
    March 2013
    February 2013
    January 2013
    December 2012
    October 2012
    September 2012
    August 2012
    July 2012
    June 2012
    May 2012
    April 2012
    March 2012
    February 2012
    January 2012
    December 2011
    November 2011
    October 2011
    September 2011
    August 2011
    July 2011
    June 2011
    May 2011
    April 2011
    March 2011
    February 2011
    June 2010
    May 2010
    April 2010
    March 2010
    February 2010
    December 2009
    November 2009
    October 2009
    September 2009
    August 2009
    July 2009
    June 2009
    May 2009
    November 2007

    Categories

    All

CONTACT: Cotton Campaign Coordinator - c/o International Labor Rights Forum, 1634 I Street NW, Suite 1000, Washington, DC 20006. 
+1 202-347-4100, cottoncampaigncoordinator [at] gmail.com
  • About
    • Who We Are
    • Uzbekistan's Forced Labor Problem >
      • Reports
      • Chronicle of Forced Labor
      • Photos/Video
      • FAQs
    • Turkmenistan's Forced Labor Problem >
      • Reports of Forced Labor in Turkmenistan's Cotton Sector
    • Forced Labor Cotton in Other Countries
    • Contact
  • Countries
    • Turkmenistan
    • Uzbekistan
    • Governments >
      • What other governments can do
    • International Organizations >
      • What the World Bank and Asian Development Bank can do
      • What the International Labor Organization can do
    • Companies >
      • What companies operating in Uzbekistan or Turkmenistan can do
      • What companies that use cotton can do
      • What investors can do
  • Take Action
  • Media
    • Press Releases
    • News
    • Videos
  • Blog