abusesaffiliationarrow-downarrow-leftarrow-rightarrow-upattack-typeblueskyburgerchevron-downchevron-leftchevron-rightchevron-upClock iconclosedeletedevelopment-povertydiscriminationdollardownloademailenvironmentexternal-linkfacebookfilterflaggenderglobeglobegroupshealthC4067174-3DD9-4B9E-AD64-284FDAAE6338@1xinformation-outlineinformationinstagraminvestment-trade-globalisationissueslabourlanguagesShapeCombined Shapeline, chart, up, arrow, graphLinkedInlocationmap-pinminusnewsorganisationotheroverviewpluspreviewArtboard 185profilerefreshIconnewssearchsecurityPathStock downStock steadyStock uptagticktooltiptriangletwitteruniversalitywebwhatsappxIcons / Social / YouTube

The content is also available in the following languages: 简体中文

Story

Workers paying the price: Companies respond to allegations linked to transition minerals in EECA region

In August 2026, the Business and Human Rights Centre published Workers paying the price: Hidden costs of transition minerals boom in Eastern Europe and Central Asia - 2026 analysis. The report reveals a continued pattern of human rights abuses and environmental damage caused by companies mining and processing transition minerals in EECA, highlighting the urgent need to implement the principles of a just energy transition - corporate duty of care for human rights, fair negotiations, and shared prosperity.

The analysis includes 373 publicly reported allegations of human rights and environmental abuses that took place in 2025 and are linked to mining project development, extraction and processing (smelting and refining) of 19 transition minerals in 14 EECA countries.

In line with the Centre’s strategy and libel policy, we made every effort to reach out to companies accused of abuse and invited them to respond to the allegations through our Company Response Mechanism, except in cases where the company had already issued a public statement, the abuse was the subject of legal or regulatory action, or the company had no website or contact information available.

We invited 32 companies to respond to the findings. Serbia Zijin Copper was invited separately to respond to the Krivelj village case study featured in the report. We were unable to invite two companies, Rudnik Antimona doo and Metal Gold LLC, due to a lack of publicly available contact information. Eight companies responded. All responses and non-responses are available below.

Company Responses

Kapan mining and processing company View Response
Zijin Mining View Response
Norilsk Nickel View Response
Perzhanska Ore Company View Response
Ulba Metallurgical Plant JSC View Response
GeoProMining

No Response

Yugo Metals

No Response

DPM Metals Inc (former Dundee Precious Metals)

No Response

Georgian Manganese LLC View Response
Kazakhmys

No Response

JSC Non-Ferrous Metal Processing Plant

No Response

Ust-Kamenogorsk Titanium and Magnesium Plant JSC

No Response

Temirtau Electrometallurgical Plant JSC

No Response

Qarmet (formerly ArcelorMittal Temirtau)

No Response

Bapy Mining LLP

No Response

Glencore View Response
Kazchrome

No Response

Mendia Resources LLC

No Response

KAZ Minerals PLC

No Response

Trepca mining and industrial processing complex

No Response

Kumtor Gold Company

No Response

Minstroy Holding JSC

No Response

JSC Russian Copper Company

No Response

Evraz

No Response

JSC Holding Company Metalloinvest

No Response

Highland Gold

No Response

Rosatom

No Response

Ural Mining and Metallurgical Company (UMMC)

No Response

United Company RUSAL

No Response

Almalyk Mining and Metallurgical Complex

No Response

Kryvyi Rih iron ore plant PJSC

No Response

Marhanets Mining & Processing Plant PJSC

No Response

Serbia Zijin Copper DOO (JV between Zijin Mining (63%) and Government of Serbia (37%)) View Response

Timeline