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 Mar 2012

Author:
Edward Wyatt, New York Times

Use of ‘Conflict Minerals’ Gets More Scrutiny From U.S.

The [Dodd-Frank regulation]...is aimed at cutting off the brutal militia groups that have often taken over the mining and sale of so-called conflict minerals to finance their military aims. Just about every company affected by the law says they support it, but many business groups have also been pushing aggressively to put wiggle room in the restrictions…The agency[Securities and Exchange Commission,] is moving slowly...This month, Mary L. Schapiro, the agency’s chairwoman, said the agency hoped to complete the process “in the next couple of months.”…[However,] groups that support the new regulation say a growing number of companies — Intel, Motorola and Hewlett-Packard among them, according to the Enough Project…have already made significant steps to inspect and adjust their supply lines to avoid tainted sources of conflict minerals. “Our hope,” said Darren Fenwick…“is that the rule is strong enough that companies in industries that aren’t doing anything will start to feel the pressure in their supply chains.” [also refers to Kraft, Calvert Investments, Intel, Motorola, HP]