Scroll to top

Court Urged to Review “Conflict Minerals” Case

No comments

Court Urged to Review “Conflict Minerals” Case

Posted by Enough Team on October 29, 2015

Enough Project: Court of Appeals Review of “Exceptional Importance” on Issues of Corporate Transparency, Peace in Congo

October 29, 2015 (Washington DC) – In a statement released today, the Enough Project urged the US Court of Appeals for the DC Circuit to review a “damaging” recent court decision which challenges the Securities and Exchange Commission’s Conflict Minerals Rule mandated by Section 1502 of the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform Act.

The case, National Association of Manufacturers (NAM) et al. v. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC), is of “exceptional importance” on issues of corporate transparency and peace in the Democratic Republic of Congo, and should not stand without review.

Holly Dranginis, Policy Analyst at the Enough Project, said: “In today’s globalizing world, corporate free speech and its connection with global security and human welfare is of increasing importance.”

Statement excerpt: “The American people, the people of Congo, and all communities affected by global markets and supply chains deserve clarity from the US courts on consumers’ right to know, and the limits of corporate secrecy allowed by the US constitution.”

Experts from Enough, an atrocity prevention policy group, are available for comment today. For media inquiries or interview requests, please contact: Greg Hittelman, gh@enoughproject.org

Complete statement by the Enough Project:

Conflict minerals court case is of “exceptional importance” and should be reviewed

October 29, 2015

The Enough Project urges the US Court of Appeals for the DC Circuit to review the case, National Association of Manufacturers (NAM) et al. v. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC), to ensure that a damaging recent decision on the issues of corporate free speech and peace in the Democratic Republic of Congo does not stand without review.

The Enough Project recognizes that en banc rehearings are reserved for rare cases of exceptional importance, or where review is needed to maintain jurisprudential uniformity. This case, which challenges the SEC’s Conflict Minerals Rule mandated by Section 1502 of the Dodd Frank Wall Street Reform Act, fits those criteria. With freedom of speech at the core of the challenge, a key constitutional issue is also at stake.

Corporate transparency related to conflict minerals is of exceptional, measurable public interest and importance. Students from over 150 schools around the United States and another 20 abroad have mobilized to change their schools’ procurement policies. They have also joined the wider conflict-free consumer movement, encouraging companies to clean up their supply chains, source conflict-free minerals from Congo, and invest in development in Africa’s Great Lakes region.

Most recently, more than 500 students signed on to a letter to U.S. Special Envoy to the Great Lakes region Tom Perriello, asking him to prioritize tackling key challenges on conflict minerals. Nineteen schools have passed resolutions declaring their commitment to purchase electronics from companies pursuing a conflict-free supply chain and supporting peace in Congo. Five US cities and two states have passed similar resolutions, indicating an even wider demographic of support for corporate disclosures and the conflict-free movement.

On the specific topic of this case – the SEC’s Conflict Minerals Rule – many major American and international news media outlets have published features, including the New York Times, the Wall Street Journal, Al Jazeera, the Washington Post, National Geographic, and many others. Leading constitutional scholars and Congolese activists and have also written in prominent publications on the issue, including an open letter in support of Dodd Frank 1502, signed by 31 experts, former ambassadors, and Congolese civil society leaders.

Review is also needed to maintain uniformity in the court’s decisions. By failing to apply Zauderer’s rational review standard of scrutiny in NAM, the court ruled in contradiction to its opinion in American Meat Institute, which said Zauderer applies in cases related to country-of-origin product labeling. Its decision also contradicts Holder v. Humanitarian Law Project by failing to defer adequately to Congress on a rule directly related to foreign affairs.

Corporate free speech and its connection with global security and human welfare is of increasing importance in today’s globalizing world. The American people, the people of Congo, and all communities affected by global markets and supply chains deserve clarity from the US courts on consumers’ right to know, and the limits of corporate secrecy allowed by the US constitution.

– – –

Link to statement

Resource page for journalists covering conflict minerals issues – “Progress and Challenges on Conflict Minerals: Facts on Dodd-Frank 1502”:  http://eno.ug/1iCJiVj

For media inquiries or interview requests, please contact:
Greg Hittelman, Director of Communications, +1 310 717 0606gh@enoughproject.org

About THE ENOUGH PROJECT
The Enough Project, an atrocity prevention policy group, seeks to build leverage for peace and justice in Africa by helping to create real consequences for the perpetrators and facilitators of genocide and other mass atrocities. Enough aims to counter rights-abusing armed groups and violent kleptocratic regimes that are fueled by grand corruption, transnational crime and terror, and the pillaging and trafficking of minerals, ivory, diamonds, and other natural resources. Enough conducts field research in conflict zones, develops and advocates for policy recommendations, supports social movements in affected countries, and mobilizes public campaigns. Learn more – and join us – at www.EnoughProject.org