ASICS’ statement of 28 August 2025 fails to address the urgent demands of justice and accountability in the case of Mr. Chea Chan, a union leader subjected to wrongful arrest and incarceration in retaliation for asserting his basic rights at work. While ASICS conveys concern and reports supplier engagement, its approach remains procedural and insulated—used for more than 18 months as a pretext to avoid delivering meaningful remediation or genuine respect for freedom of association.

ASICS’ insistence that “further investigation” is required is itself evidence of the company’s strategy: to fabricate reasons for inaction rather than deliver the remedies it could and should have ensured in January 2024 when it was clear how far Wing Star Shoes would go to repress freedom of association. This approach stands in stark contradiction to ASICS’ own public human rights commitments to workers in its supply chain.

Contrary to ASICS’ attempts to justify their failure to act meaningfully, the corporations has not responded with urgency or seriousness to egregious abuses committed by its supplier, Wing Star Shoes. Its most recent statement builds on misleading assertions already put forward last year. Below we address some of ASICS’ claims to set the record straight:

ASICS’ false claim regarding the origins of the criminal complaint.

ASICS stated: “Wing Star Shoes did not file a criminal charge against Mr. Chan.”

This is demonstrably false. Court documents, including the publicly available appeal verdict, clearly show that a representative of Wing Star Shoes filed the complaint with police, which led directly to Mr. Chan’s arrest and prosecution. The Prosecution itself acknowledged that it had “no evidence of any kind at all” against him. Despite having access to these records, ASICS has attempted to cast doubt on facts that are beyond dispute.

ASICS’ claim of ensuring non-discrimination against supply chain workers.

ASICS asserted: “We have made clear to the factory that any form of isolation or discriminatory treatment is unacceptable.”

In reality, following his release from prison, Mr. Chan has been forced by Wing Star Shoes to work in an isolated outbuilding for nearly a year—amounting to punitive solitary confinement in the workplace. This is a continuation of retaliation, not the elimination of it.

ASICS’ claim of reinstatement to Chan’s original role by 1 September.

ASICS stated: “As of September 1, Mr. Chan will return to his original position.”

On 1 September, Mr. Chan was again denied a return to his role as mechanical supervisor across both main factory buildings. Instead, he remains relegated to the outbuilding and is only permitted to enter one main building when additional machines need preparation, and is otherwise still confined to the outbuilding, alone. This is not reinstatement; it is continued exclusion in retaliation for Mr Chan’s attempt to assert basic rights at work, illustrating ASICS’ failure to ensure even the most basic due diligence with its close business partner, Wing Star Shoes.

ASICS’ claim of engagement with grassroots stakeholders.

ASICS stated: “Since early 2024, ASICS has actively worked… through direct engagement with CATU.”

This is misleading. ASICS has failed to remain in contact with CATU and there has not been any correspondence with CATU for more than a year. When CATU finally wrote directly to ASICS on 8 August 2025, the company ignored the correspondence, despite repeated follow-up attempts.

Similarly, the company deployed agents of another company sourcing from Wing Star Shoes, Muji, to assess the situation by speaking to Chan and CATU, yet these two individuals claimed to have no knowledge of Chan’s false imprisonment and failed to conduct any reasonable follow up despite these meetings taking place in February 2025.

ASICS’ claim of ‘supporting’ Mr. Chan during his false imprisonment

ASICS stated: “During his detention, ASICS maintained engagement with the factory to ensure Mr. Chan’s health, safety, and wellbeing were supported.”

This ignores the root cause: Mr. Chan was imprisoned solely because of Wing Star Shoes’ false complaint. By refusing to provide remedy—compensation for the suffering and hardship imposed on Mr. Chan and his family—ASICS has abdicated its responsibility under its own human rights commitments.

ASICS’ claim regarding union rights.

ASICS asserted: “Workers have the right to join or establish unions of their choosing.”

Eighteen months after its supplier fabricated a complaint against a union leader, ASICS has taken no steps to restore workers’ associational rights at Wing Star Shoes. Instead, the company continues to reference “yellow unions” controlled by management while ignoring evidence that genuine, independent organising is obstructed. ASICS’ concerning claims regarding the support of a “Human Rights Committee” without indicating whether the committee includes worker-elected representatives free from management influence is yet another indicator that company has failed to recognise that the false imprisonment and ongoing isolation of Mr. Chan has had a chilling effect on all 20,000 workers’ ability to exercise their rights at the factory.

ASICS’ reliance on controversial Better Work assessments for due diligence

ASICS points to ILO Better Work as evidence of “progress.” This is disingenuous. ASICS itself signed a joint letter last year criticizing the Cambodian government’s retaliation against a report highlighting Better Work’s monitoring failures—especially its inability to accurately report violations of freedom of association. To now cite Better Work as evidence of improvement is both inconsistent and misleading.

In conclusion, ASICS is engaging in a pattern of denial, delay, and misrepresentation—while continuing to benefit from a supplier that punishes workers for exercising basic rights. This conduct makes ASICS a bad-faith actor: professing respect for labour rights to consumers while denying those rights to the workers who produce its shoes.

We therefore demand that ASICS immediately:

• Ensure that Chea Chan is restored without delay to his original job duties as mechanical supervisor within the main factory;
• Provide full financial compensation, covering lost wages, legal fees, medical expenses, and the economic harm suffered by his family; and
• Commit publicly to respect labour rights by requiring Wing Star Shoes to end retaliation, recognise workers’ right to organize freely, and ensure genuine freedom of association at the factory.