abusesaffiliationarrow-downarrow-leftarrow-rightarrow-upattack-typeburgerchevron-downchevron-leftchevron-rightchevron-upClock iconclosedeletedevelopment-povertydiscriminationdollardownloademailenvironmentexternal-linkfacebookfiltergenderglobegroupshealthC4067174-3DD9-4B9E-AD64-284FDAAE6338@1xinformation-outlineinformationinstagraminvestment-trade-globalisationissueslabourlanguagesShapeCombined Shapeline, chart, up, arrow, graphLinkedInlocationmap-pinminusnewsorganisationotheroverviewpluspreviewArtboard 185profilerefreshIconnewssearchsecurityPathStock downStock steadyStock uptagticktooltiptwitteruniversalityweb
Article

19 Aug 2015

Author:
Global Witness

Global Witness: Conflict Minerals Law Remains on the Books despite Damaging Decision

See all tags

Global Witness fundamentally disagrees with a decision reached today by the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit that misinterprets the First Amendment in order to grant corporations a constitutional right to conceal information about whether minerals in their supply chains may have funded conflict. Today’s court decision applies only to the requirement to describe companies’ products as “not been found to be DRC conflict free” and leaves the rest of the regulations intact. “This dangerous and damaging ruling could allow corporations to hide information they would prefer their consumers and investors not to know, said Zorka Milin, Senior Legal Advisor at Global Witness. “Today’s decision affects not only the conflict minerals rule but could also be exploited by companies to bring legal challenges to other corporate transparency laws.”

Timeline