THE G20 OBLIGATION
Achieving Sustainable, Fair, and Inclusive
Global Supply Chains

What is modern slavery?
In this report, modern slavery is used as an umbrella termthat focuses attention on the commonalities across different
concepts, such as human trafficking, forced labour, debt
bondage, forced or servile marriage, and the sale andexploitation of children. Essentially, it refers to situationsof exploitation that a person cannot refuse or leave
because of threats, violence, coercion, abuse of power,
or deception.
Figure 1
Modern slavery is an umbrella term

DERN SLAVERY
MO
Trafficking for labourand sexual exploitation

Forced labour

Forced labour
as a result offorced marriage

Slavery andslavery like practices(including forced
marriage)

Cover: Miner working in an Angolan village not
far from the Congolese border. Diamond extractionin Angola has over the past decades been linked totorture, murder, and forced displacement, and relies
on both child labour and forced labour.
Photo credit: Olivier Polet/ Corbis via Getty Images

Copyright © 2018. The Minderoo Foundation Pty Ltd.
All rights reserved.

Humantrafficking(cross border andwithin a country)

Trafficking for slavery
and slavery likepracticesCONTENTS
The Case for a G20 Action Plan
A nine-point action plan for the G20 to eradicate forced labour,
modern slavery and child labour

4
5

A Brief History

6

Essays8

Public procurement: The trillion-dollar missing link
Political leadership can end modern slavery
Importing Risk
Why focus on the G20?
Understanding the risk imported by G20 countries
What does the analysis tell us?
What are G20 governments doing?
Endnotes

8
10
12
12
13
14
17
46

4

Walk Free Foundation

THE CASE FOR A G20 ACTION PLAN

To end forced labour, modern slavery and, child labour in global supply chains

At the same time as the globalisation of our economies has
seen hundreds of millions of people lifted out of poverty, we
have seen the growth of modern slavery, such that on any
one day in 2016, 40 million people were in modern slavery.

It is clear that the G20 countries, which are responsible for
80 percent of the world’s trade, have a clear and immediate
responsibility for responding to modern slavery both
domestically and beyond their borders.

The Walk Free Foundation (WFF) and International Labour
Organization (ILO), in partnership with the International
Organization for Migration (IOM), published the first
Joint Global Estimates of Modern Slavery in 2017, which
estimated that 40.3 million people were in modern slavery
in 2016, 25 million of whom were in forced labour. The ILO
further estimates that there are 152 million boys and girls
in child labour and that the encouraging reduction in childlabour has slowed in recent years.

To their credit, the G20 have taken some steps to addressthese issues and the German Presidency in 2017 applied
focus to the challenge of fostering decent work forsustainable global supply chains.

Modern slavery is an umbrella term that captures the rangeof multifaceted and complex crimes, which include all formsof human trafficking, forced labour, debt bondage, forced
or servile marriage, and the worst forms of child labour.
We know that millions of people in modern slavery arebeing exploited to work, often as low skilled labour, as partof a supply chain producing goods that are distributed toconsumers throughout the world.
With the rapid acceleration of globalisation, global supply
chains have grown exponentially, transforming the wayorganisations conduct cross-border production, investment,
trade, and employment. Multinational enterprises haveinherently complex, diverse, and dynamic supply chains.
Citizens of most G20 countries enjoy relatively low levelsof modern slavery within their borders. Nonetheless,businesses and governments in G20 countries areimporting products that are at risk of modern slavery on asignificant scale.
Looking only at the “top five” at-risk products in terms ofdollar value in each G20 country identified by our analysis,
G20 countries are collectively importing US$354 billion
worth of at-risk products annually.

However, without a concrete action plan led by the G20
countries, the existing policies and statements will not drivea reduction in the prevalence of forced and child labour.
The G20 has a unique capability to tackle the economic
drivers of the exploitation of millions of people.
To maximise their impact, the G20 must directly engage
business, unions and civil society to harness their skills andresources in a concerted initiative.
The Walk Free Foundation has suggested the key elementsthat could constitute an effective action plan for the G20.
These focus areas should include driving legislation thatwill help increase transparency in business supply chainsand public procurement, promoting and demanding
minimum standards for ethical recruitment in theircountries, providing regional leadership, and ratifying key
international conventions, such as the ILO 2014 Protocol to
the Forced Labour Convention.
G20 leaders are in possession of the facts – we know how
many victims of modern slavery there are and in whichcountries and industries they are exploited. The G20 must
now use this knowledge and take the actions that will havereal impact, as in the end, we all share the culpability for themisery of millions of people.

THE G20 OBLIGATION﻿

5

A nine-point action plan for the G20 to eradicate forced labour,
modern slavery, and child labour
The G20 should adopt an action plan that delivers on their commitments to end modern slavery and achieve SDG 8.7.
This plan should contain the following nine elements:

1 / Implement transparency in global
business supply chains
G20 Governments will develop legislation andframeworks that requires large businesses to conduct
due diligence and regularly report on steps taken
to eliminate modern slavery within their businessand supply chains. The Governments will work withbusiness to develop best practice requirements andensure the alignment of legislation with international
principles such as the United Nations Guiding
Principles on Business and Human Rights.

2 / Enhance public procurement standards
to ensure sustainable, fair, and inclusive
public supply chains
G20 Governments will require publicly funded
entities to implement procurement systems that
ensure their supply chains mitigate against the riskof modern slavery and support decent work, andethical recruitment and business practices.

3 / Utilise import regulations and trade
agreements to prevent the import ofgoods made by forced labour
G20 Governments will consider legislating theprohibition of the importing of goods produced byforced labour, similar to the 1930 US Tariff Act, andinclude clauses preventing the use of forced labour
in international trade agreements.

4 / Require ethical recruitment practices
G20 Governments will strengthen labour laws toprotect labour rights and implement standards
that ensure ethical recruitment and safe migration
pathways. They will actively promote the “Employer
Pays” Principle which prohibits the charging ofrecruitment fees to the employee.

5 / Ratify relevant international conventions
and strengthen domestic legal frameworks
G20 Governments will ratify the key international
conventions, including the 2014 ILO Protocol to theForced Labour Convention, and implement domestic
legislation that provides a framework for the protectionof people from forced labour, modern slavery and childlabour. The G20 will encourage and support othercountries to also ratify key conventions.

6 / Develop national action plans to promote
non-exploitative working standards
Every G20 Government will implement a national
action plan which sets out concrete actions to end
modern slavery, achieve decent work, and drive
responsible business conduct and compliance withdomestic labour laws.

7 / Establish a joint G20, L20, and B20 Strategy
Group to support the SDG 8.7 Target
G20 Governments will establish a strategy group todrive progress towards achievement of SDG 8.7. The
strategy group will include leaders from the B20 and
L20 in order to harness the knowledge and resourcesof business and unions to assist the G20 Governments
in delivering on their international commitments.

8 / Provide regional leadership
G20 Governments will develop or strengthen existingregional initiatives to combat modern slavery and relatedtransnational crimes. These initiatives will support
capacity building in countries with less economic
resources, support enforcement efforts and target highrisk industries or regions.

9 / Drive data collection,
research and innovation
G20 Governments will actively tackle the drivers of
exploitation by implementing evidence-based policy.
Policy decisions will be enhanced by improved data,
identifying key risks and innovative solutions.

6

Walk Free Foundation

A BRIEF HISTORY

G20 action toward achieving Sustainable Development Goal 8.7

The UN Sustainable Development Goal (SDG) 8.7 calls for
immediate and effective measures to eradicate forced
labour, end modern slavery and human trafficking, andby 2025 end child labour in all its forms. The international
community has committed to take the action required to put
an end to these crimes. The G20 member states accountfor about 80 percent of worldwide trade. They have a joint
responsibility to lead action to support the attainment ofdecent work and strengthen compliance with fundamental
principles and rights at work in global supply chains.

The G20 Labour and Employment ministers called on theirgovernments to implement the ILO’s 2014 Protocol to theForced Labour Convention and other relevant conventions.
Additionally, the G20 Labour and Employment Ministers'
recommendations focus on the role of business ineliminating modern slavery, including engaging in fairrecruitment practices, and the responsibility of business tohelp facilitate an inclusive global economy and exercise due
diligence in line with the United Nations Guiding Principles
on Business and Human Rights (UNGPs).

In 2016, the G20 Leaders’ Summit in Hangzhou, China,
endorsed the ‘G20 Action Plan on the 2030 Agenda
for Sustainable Development’ which, for the first time,
established the G20 countries’ commitment to achieve
the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development.1

In support of the SDG targets and the G20 policy, the UK
Government launched a ‘Call to Action to End Forced
Labour, Modern Slavery, and Human Trafficking’ during themeeting of the UN General Assembly in September 2017.

The 2017 G20 Leaders’ Declaration acknowledged that
there remained challenges to achieving an inclusive, fairand sustainable globalisation and that sustainable andinclusive supply chains must include fostering labour
standards and human rights in line with internationallyrecognised frameworks.2

Signatory countries committed to provide leadership andtake a series of measures to advance the achievement of
SDG 8.7. Those included addressing public procurement
practices, developing regulatory or policy frameworks, andworking with business to eradicate forced labour, modern
slavery, human trafficking, and the worst forms of childlabour from global supply chains.

The 2017 G20 Labour and Employment Ministers Meetingproduced a significant set of policy priorities for fostering
decent work for sustainable global supply chains. The
Declaration stressed that the G20 have a joint responsibility
to promote decent work and a duty to protect fundamental
principles and rights at work as a foundation for an inclusive
global economy and fair globalisation.3

The ‘Call to Action’ has been signed by at least 12 of theG20 Governments, many of whom have taken strong
measures domestically.
In the context of these high-level national commitments
the time is well overdue for all G20 countries to turntheir commitments into a program of impactful andpractical actions.

THE G20 OBLIGATION

Ouagadougou, Burkina Faso: In this gravel-pit, hundreds ofpeople are working in horrendous conditions and many of them
are children. Instead of going to school, they are working all day
in very dangerous conditions, and are exposed to toxic smoke
emitted from burnt tyres used to explode the granite.
Photo credit: Veronique de Viguerie/Getty Images

7

8

Walk Free Foundation

PUBLIC PROCUREMENT:THE TRILLION-DOLLAR MISSING LINK
Andrew Forrest AO | Chairman, Fortescue Metals Group& Chevaan Daniel | Group Director, The Capital Maharaja Organisation Limited

No one speaks in favour of modern slavery, and slavery has noreal friends. At best, it can be said that slavery has temporary
acquaintances, people who rely on slavery for short term profit.

No country or business can build its future on slavery.
Indeed, slavery thwarts economic empowerment and puts
a ceiling on growth.
All sides of politics are unified behind this point, a rarity
in today’s fractured policy landscape. Likewise, businesshas led its own reform and has shown its willingness towork with government in joint endeavours. The leadersof all faiths have come together and shared their common
abhorrence of slavery in their teachings.
Still, despite this leadership many continue to benefit fromthis often invisible crime, or resign themselves to accepting
modern slavery as an inevitability.
Modern slavery is a human condition of our own making
which can be ended by concerted action. It is a multi-billion
dollar transnational criminal business which, on any one
given day in 2016, ensnared 40.3 million people.
The scale of this truly global and abhorrent practice isstaggering and will not be rectified until there is significant
cooperation between business and government. One of thefirst areas to address is rooting out slavery where it exists insupply chains, be they of major businesses or governments.
Many governments are the biggest buyers of goods andservices in their countries. Public procurement represents,
on average, around 12 percent of a country’s GDP and it isestimated to be in the order of the GDP which equals to
US$1.6 trillion worldwide.

While some governments are setting reporting requirements
for corporations, there are a paucity of measures directed atminimising the risks of modern slavery in public procurementin these policy responses. Governments need to get theirhouses in order.
This is a failure of leadership and an insult to business, which
is tasked with meeting high expectations by policy makers
who fail to measure themselves to the same standards.
Continued inaction by governments exposes them toenormous reputational risk and economic consequences.
Thankfully, there are green shoots of progress. This year’s
Global Slavery Index finds 36 countries are taking steps toinvestigate forced labour in business or public supply chains,up from just four countries in 2016. Of the 36 countries, 25
are taking steps on government procurement. And there is
no reason why the figure can’t be higher.
The countries which collaborate beyond their own borders
to adopt regional approaches to stamp out slavery will
be rewarded with stronger societies, robust trade, andsustainable growth. Those that take steps to clean up
labour issues at home will send the best possible signals
to the investment world.
For investment destinations that are both accountable andattractive, there is almost no shortage of capital available.
As more is learned about slavery, and how to measure it,
investors will increasingly steer clear of opportunities thatcome with exposure to slavery risk. Business leaders areTHE G20 OBLIGATION

acutely aware of the attractiveness of certain investment
destinations and often labour issues and other social
problems are serious deterrents to new ventures.
In the short-term, slavery may fill criminals’ pockets withillegal profits, but in the long-term, the national profits of acountry that allows slavery to thrive will be dragged down.
Economic empowerment is the key to long-term growth andso it is no surprise that slavery, more than many other factors,
cruels sustainable development.
As scrutiny increases down the longtail of multi-national companies’ supply
chains, countries that continue to allow
modern slavery within their borders areat ever increasing risk of tarnishing theirreputation and losing out on trade.
But slavery is not just a problem fordeveloping countries seeking investment.

Our analysis found G20 countries are collectively importingat least US$354 billion worth of at-risk products annually– for example seafood from Thailand, electronics from
Malaysia, or coal from North Korea.
Business too has a critical role to play here. The old paradigm
of name and shame has not delivered comprehensive reform,
rather it has often discouraged businesses from looking too
closely in case they discover abuses.

We need a paradigm
shift to encouragebusinesses to seek out
abuses in their supply
chains, and reward
leaders who take on
the responsibility andchallenge of addressing
modern slavery.

The great challenge with modern slavery
is that not only is it hidden within thedepths of criminal networks that aretrafficking people for exploitation, butmodern slavery also occurs where mainstream industries
meet informal economies.
Slavery exists in all corners of the planet and touches us all
through trade and consumer choices.

The Walk Free Foundation has engaged with the G20
process to ensure that the countries responsible for 80
percent of the world’s economic activity take responsibility
The decision of the G20 in Germany in 2017 to prioritise
the issue of modern slavery and develop policy responses
was a huge step forward. It is now time for each of thosecountries to act.
We are encouraged by developments in G20 countries
including Australia, Brazil, France, Germany, Italy, the United
Kingdom, and the United States on public procurement.
But, as the 2018 Global Slavery Index finds, there is still along way to go.

9

We need a paradigm shift to encouragebusinesses to seek out abuses in their supply
chains, and reward leaders who take on the
responsibility and challenge of addressing
modern slavery. We need to celebrate thediscovery of slavery as the first step toremedy the problem and empower thoseafflicted. This will drive businesses to ensure
they are not enabling this crime.

Investors are more alert to this issue thanever before and are increasingly demanding
businesses act with impact. Some of the largest
institutional investors in the world are tellingmajor corporations to improve their social
footprint or face losing out on billions of dollars of investment.
True business leaders know that creating sustainable supply
chains can contribute positively towards growth, improve
competition, provide job opportunities, and bring families
out of poverty. This is a sustainable business model.
By providing decent work or demanding their suppliersand contractors do, companies are investing in the futuresof communities. Profits and purpose are not mutually
exclusive. In the long term, everyone loses out from slavery.
We have a tremendous opportunity to capitalise on the
progress made and the commitment of so many to end themisery of 40.3 million of our fellow human beings.
It is an opportunity we must not let slip.

Businesses and governments in G20 countries areimporting masses of products that come with significant
risks of being produced using modern slavery.

Yum, 29, sold from Cambodia on to a Thai fishing boat
“One of my friends said he and a few others were leaving to findwork. The next day we got a taxi and headed for Thailand. A man
offered us £150 to work on a construction site, but drove us to a busy
sea port instead. We sailed for days before they told us we’d beensold to the Thais to work as fishermen. After nine months at sea, I
knew I had to escape. Now I have a newborn baby, a wife and noprospects of work. Maybe I will try to find work again in Thailand”
Photo credit: George Nickels for The Guardian

10

Walk Free Foundation

POLITICAL LEADERSHIPCAN END MODERN SLAVERY
Sharan Burrow1 | General Secretary International Trade Union Confederation

Modern slavery is everywhere. From the construction of FIFA World
Cup stadiums in Qatar to the cotton farms of Uzbekistan, from cattle
ranches in Paraguay to fisheries in Thailand and the Philippines toagriculture in Italy, from sweatshops in Brazil and Argentina to berry
pickers in Sweden. The production chains of clothes, food, andservices consumed globally are tainted with forced labour.

The world is three times richer in terms of global GDP thanit was 30 years ago yet we have historic levels of inequality.
Eighty percent of the world’s people say that the minimum
wage is not enough to live on, work is more insecure witha predominance of short term contracts or other nonstandard forms of employment, and both informal workand modern slavery are not only growing but increasingly
prevalent in the supply chains of large corporations.
In the global private economy, the ILO
calculates forced labour generates $150
billion each year but it could be even higher.
In all countries, unscrupulous employers
and recruiters are increasingly exploiting
gaps in international labour and migration
law and enforcement. After drugs and arms,
human trafficking is now the world’s third
biggest crime business.

Yet when it comes to the very people companies rely
on to produce their profits, few respect the rights of or
take responsibility for decent work for workers. Up to 94
percent of the global workforce of 50 major corporations is
a hidden workforce because responsibility has been simply
outsourced many times over.

Due diligence and transparency is the key to ending
modern slavery in supply chains. Where corporations
take responsibility for due diligence andconsequently make their supply chains
The world is threetransparent then it is possible to establish
grievance procedures that can facilitate
times richer in terms
remedy of any violations of rights at workof global GDP than itfrom forced labour to paying below thewas 30 years ago yet we minimum wage.

have historic levels of
inequality.

Cleaning it up is possible.
No corporation or investor would blindly sign a contract,enter into a merger or risk large sums of capital without
doing due diligence. Assessing risk is a corner stone ofsuccessful business practice and corporations expect therule of law to protect their interests.

The critical ingredient to end slavery ispolitical will. G20 Labour Ministers accept
that the global economy cannot be built on
oppression and rights violations, now weneed government leaders to stare down corporate greed.
Everybody’s sons and daughters must be afforded thesame rights, wages, and decent work we want for our own.

THE G20 OBLIGATION

11

Top left: Representatives of Commonwealth countries attending theCommonwealth Day service at Westminster Abbey on March 12,2007 in London, England
Photo credit: Tim Graham/Getty Images
Above: An irregular immigrant working as a fisherman on a fishingboat in Phuket, Thailand. Many migrants see little chance in
Myanmar for a life of proper employment and so many make thechoice to contact a broker that could help them get across the borderillegally to work in Thailand as hotel staff or fishermen.
Photo credit: Jonas Gratzer/LightRocket via Getty Images

12

Walk Free Foundation

IMPORTING RISK.

G20 countries and import of products at risk of modern slavery

There is a clear, compelling, and urgent need to find solutions to themany complex factors that enable modern slavery to persist. To date,most research on modern slavery has focused on the countries where theexploitation is taking place, which typically are the world’s least developed
countries and particularly those that are heavily impacted by known risk
factors, such as conflict, failure of rule of law, mass displacement, andendemic discrimination. While this focus is important, the realities of global
trade and commerce make it inevitable that products generated by modern
slavery will travel across borders and into higher income countries where theprevalence of modern slavery is low.

Accordingly, in this chapter we examine the issue ofmodern slavery not from the perspective of where thecrime is perpetrated, but rather from where the productsof the crime are sold and consumed, with a specific focus
on G20 countries. The resulting analysis presents a stark
contrast in terms of both risk and responsibility. As theresearch in this Index confirms, citizens in G20 countries
enjoy relatively low levels of vulnerability to this crime
within their borders and many aspects of their government
responses to preventing this crime are comparatively
strong. Nonetheless, businesses and governments in
G20 countries are importing products that are at risk ofmodern slavery, with hardly any effort being applied bygovernments to regulate the labour conditions involved intheir production.
This chapter draws on research to identify and validate ashort list of products at risk of modern slavery, and thenmaps out the extent to which these products are imported
by G20 countries1. It is important to note that no single
product is completely the result of forced labour. However, in
the absence of information on the proportion that is tainted,
our analysis shows the potential reach of modern slavery
into countries considered to have low levels of vulnerability
and comparatively strong responses. The methodology
behind this research can be found in Appendix 3 in the
Global Slavery Index, available for download at www.
globalslaveryindex.org.

Why focus on the G20?
The UN Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights(UNGPs) were the first international reference framework
on human rights in the context of business. Adopted by the
UN Human Rights Council in 2011, the UNGPs placed on
the international agenda the issue of identifying potential
adverse impacts on human rights by business activity.2 The
UN Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) and in particular
Target 8.7, which calls for effective measures to end forced
labour, modern slavery, and human trafficking, as well
as child labour in all its forms,3 has further contributed tothe push within the international community to eradicate
modern slavery, including through initiatives and policies
to ensure public and business supply chains are free fromthis crime.
While initiatives like the SDGs apply to all countries,
individual countries have different levels of impact andinfluence on the global economy. The G20 countries
collectively account for nearly 80 percent of world trade
and about 85 percent of the world’s GDP.4 Two of the G20's
member countries, China5 and the United States (US),6 are
the world’s largest exporting and importing economies
respectively. While some G20 countries have a focus onmodern slavery abroad through their aid programs, it iscritical to examine their efforts to address modern slavery
through economic and trade measures.

THE G20 OBLIGATION

In 2017, G20 leaders committed to fostering human rights
due diligence in corporate operations and supply chains inline with internationally recognised standards such as the
UNGPs.7 This includes working toward establishing policy
frameworks and National Action Plans on business andhuman rights to effectively eliminate forced labour, humantrafficking, and modern slavery.8 Given the economic power
and influence of the G20, this represents a massive step
forward on this issue.

Understanding the risk imported
by G20 countries
There are two important factors to understanding thetransfer of risk from source countries to consumer countries.
The first is to identify which globally-traded products arelikely to be at risk of being produced using modern slavery,
and the second is to match them with their trade value.
In this analysis, we focus on the at risk products that areimported into G20 countries and their value.
We created a shortlist of 15 products that appeared mostfrequently in the 2016 US Department of Labor list of
goods produced by forced labour.9 To ensure we wereusing the most up to date information, we validated every
product on our initial shortlist through our own research(which resulted in some additions and deletions), and13

supplemented it with our own data on cocoa and fishing(see Appendix 3 in the Global Slavery Index, available fordownload at www.globalslaveryindex.org). This resulted
in the products and source countries listed in Figure 2.
It is important to note that the quality and level of available
information about both the nature of modern slavery andscale of the problem in these sectors varies widely. In somecases, it is heavily affected by the ability of researchers
to validate information. For example, the information onmodern slavery in cocoa production is based on random
sample surveys undertaken in Ghana and Côte d’Ivoire in
2017, so the information is recent. This reflects the fact thatthe governments of these countries enable and facilitate
research. In contrast, the information on the situation in
the North Korean coal mines can be obtained only fromdefectors from that country, which remains entirely shut off
from independent research scrutiny. Equally, some of theresearch points to widescale problems (such as the researchon the Thai fishing industry), whereas in other cases it is lessclear if problems are widescale or isolated, as there is lessinformation available. For example, information on forced
labour in Chinese electronics manufacturing is based mostly
on isolated reports of labour abuses in specific companies,
as academic and other independent research on forced
labour in China is very scarce. The process used to develop
the list contained in Figure 2 is written up in Appendix 3 in
the Global Slavery Index, available for download at www.
globalslaveryindex.org, along with the references which
identify the products as being at-risk.

FIGURE 2
List of products at risk of forced labour by source countries
COTTON: Kazakhstan, Tajikistan, Turkmenistan, Uzbekistan
BRICKS: Afghanistan, India, Myanmar, Nepal, Pakistan
GARMENTS – APPAREL & CLOTHING ACCESSORIES: Argentina, Brazil, China, India, Malaysia, Thailand, Vietnam
CATTLE: Bolivia, Brazil, Niger, Paraguay
SUGARCANE: Brazil, Dominican Republic
GOLD: Democratic Republic of the Congo, North Korea, Peru
CARPETS: India, Pakistan
COAL: North Korea, Pakistan
FISH: Ghana, Indonesia, Thailand, Taiwan, South Korea, China, Japan, Russia10
RICE: India, Myanmar
TIMBER: Brazil, North Korea, Peru
BRAZIL NUTS / CHESTNUTS: Bolivia
COCOA: Côte d’Ivoire, Ghana
DIAMONDS: Angola
ELECTRONICS – LAPTOPS, COMPUTERS, & MOBILE PHONES: China, Malaysia

14

Walk Free Foundation

We then examined trade data for imports11 into the G20
countries to identify the top five products imported by eachcountry according to US$ value. The resulting list of top
five products across all G20 states includes the following:›› Cotton›› Apparel and clothing
accessories›› Cattle›› Sugarcane›› Gold›› Carpets›› Coal›› Fish›› Rice›› Timber›› Cocoa›› Diamonds›› Laptops, computers,
and mobile phones

The results of this research are set out in Appendix 3 in
the Global Slavery Index, available for download at www.
globalslaveryindex.org, and visually presented in the maps
at the back of this chapter.
As the 2017 Global Estimates of Modern Slavery haveshown, most forced labour exploitation occurs in domestic
work, construction, manufacturing, as well as agriculture,
forestry, and fishing.12 The products identified on our list (seeFigure 2) overlap with the sectors that the Global Estimateshave identified as where most forced labour can be found.
The Global Estimates also illustrated that female and malevictims of labour exploitation are distributed differently
across the various sectors. Whereas male victims were
mostly found in the mining, manufacturing, construction,
and agriculture sectors, female victims of forced labour
exploitation were more likely to be in the accommodationand food services industry, and in domestic work.

What does the analysis tell us?
G20 countries are importing risk of modern slavery on a
massive scale. Collectively, G20 countries are importing
US$354 billion worth of at-risk products annually. This
ranges from a minimum of US$739 million for Argentina,
to a maximum of US$144 billion for the United States. While
the strength of the supporting evidence of modern slavery
in various products certainly varies, for most products theevidence is clear and compelling. In these cases, it is almost
certain that governments and businesses are effectively
importing and trading the proceeds of crime. The mostclear-cut example of this is the import of coal by China fromthe Democratic People’s Republic of Korea (North Korea).
China imports nearly a billion US dollars’ worth of coal from
North Korea, amounting to around 98 percent of North
Korea’s total exports of coal.13 The process of digging coal isconsidered a “3D” or dirty, dangerous, and degrading job inNorth Korea, and the status of being a coal miner is inherited
rather than a choice. In recent interviews conducted with asample of North Korean defectors,14 one interviewee notedthat "in North Korea, if your parents work in the coal mines,
so will you.” He reported he was not paid for this work andhe was not free to leave or quit. He had also never seen oreven heard about an employment contract for the work he
was doing at the coal mine.

This defector also noted that “if you’re found unemployed
you’ll be punished at the labour training camp.”
The evidence of widescale abuses in the fishing industry
is also mounting. Our analysis of risk in global fisheries
suggests that of the top 20 fishing countries (by volume
of catch) fish imported from China, Japan, Russia, Spain,
South Korea, Taiwan, and Thailand are at risk of modern
slavery.15 Our literature review found firm evidence ofreported cases of labour abuse or trafficking in the last
five years for all these countries except Spain, and forIndonesia as well. Inland fisheries in Ghana, primarily in
the Lake Volta region, were found to have a high prevalenceof children that were trafficked into forced labour.16 Importdata confirm wider-scale imports of fish from the at-risksource countries of China, Ghana, Indonesia, Japan, Russia,
South Korea, Taiwan, and Thailand into a range of G20
countries, including Argentina, Australia, Brazil, Canada,
China, France, Germany, Indonesia, Italy, Japan, Mexico,
Saudi Arabia, South Korea, Russia, the UK, and the US (seeTable 3 in Appendix 3 in the Global Slavery Index, available
for download at www.globalslaveryindex.org).
Cocoa from Côte d’Ivoire and Ghana is another productthat may be tainted by modern slavery. Our own random
sample surveys conducted in Côte d’Ivoire and Ghana
in 2017 identified cases of modern slavery in the cocoa
sector in both countries. Ghana and Côte d’Ivoire are theworld’s two largest cocoa producers and their cocoa iswidely traded.17 Cocoa was identified to be within the top
five products by US$ value for 12 of the 18 G20 countries
represented in this chapter.
The government of Brazil has recently been ordered by
the Inter-American Court of Human Rights to pay US$5
million to 128 former farm workers who were enslaved on a
Brazilian cattle farm between 1988 and 2000.18 This is only
one prominent case among many others in recent years
that support the widescale existence of modern slavery inthe cattle industry in Brazil. Cattle from Brazil is one of the
top five imports of at-risk products in Italy and Russia.
Research into the cotton industry has provided evidence
that forced labour is a common phenomenon in someCentral Asian countries. In Kazakhstan, migrant workers
have been found to be affected by modern slavery during
the cotton harvest,19 whereas in Turkmenistan adults fromthe public and private sectors are forced to pick cotton
during the annual harvest and farmers are forced to fulfil
state-established cotton production quotas.20 In Tajikistan,forced labour of adults and children has allegedly decreased
over the last few years21 but may still be an issue.22 For
Uzbekistan, there is more conflicting evidence, with some
reports strongly linking the Uzbek cotton industry to forced
labour23 while other evidence provided by the International
Labour Organization (ILO) suggests that cotton pickers
are mostly recruited voluntarily.24 Turkey is the one G20
country that imports significant amounts of cotton from thosecountries. Cotton imports by Turkey total more than US$200
million from Turkmenistan, more than US$30 million fromTajikistan, and nearly US$11 million from Uzbekistan.

THE G20 OBLIGATION

Another widely imported product across all G20 states istimber from Brazil. Investigations by Repórter Brasil, one of
the largest Brazilian NGOs operating in the modern slavery
space, has revealed that workers are widely exploitedacross the Brazilian timber industry. The investigations
also link two US-based companies to timber bought from
Brazilian traders that sourced their products from Brazilian
sawmills that allegedly used modern slavery.25 Large
quantities of Brazilian timber are imported by Argentina,
France, Germany, Japan, Mexico, South Korea, and the US.
The garment and textile industry in India, particularly inSouthern India states such as Tamil Nadu, is also grapplingwith extensive labour exploitation. Garments are one of themost widely traded and most “valuable” product categories
identified on our list and are represented in the top fiveproducts of every one of the G20 countries. The three
countries with the highest-value garment imports from
India are the US (US$3.9 billion), UK (US$1.9 billion) andGermany (US$1.4 billion).

15

Electronic goods from Malaysia are also implicated in modern
slavery. Research in 2012 and 2014 into the electronics
sector in Malaysia by the US-based NGO Verité revealed
widespread forced labour in the industry.26 All G20 countries
imported electronic goods (laptops, computers, and mobile
phones) from Malaysia on an enormous scale, led by China(US$1.6 billion) and the US (US$1.5 billion).
By unravelling the trade flows and focusing on products
at risk of modern slavery that are imported by the top
economies, it becomes clear that even the wealthiest
countries have a clear and immediate responsibility for
responding to modern slavery both domestically andbeyond their borders. Developed economies are exposedto the risk of modern slavery not only when this crime isperpetrated within their national borders but also whenthat risk is effectively transferred to them via the products
they import. Policymakers, businesses, and consumers
must become aware of this risk and take responsibility for it.

Aakash, 24, from Nepal, trapped in debt bondage in the electronics industry in Malaysia“I have to work for three years just to pay off the money I borrowed to get this job. I paid
$1600 to a recruitment agent in Nepal at 48% interest. I feel terrible because of this hugeloan. I know our earnings are below the minimum wage, but what can we do about it? If
you are sick, they don’t care. They don’t want to let you return home. If you want to leave
before the end of your three year contract you have to pay three months salary. If there
was no fine, I’d go home right now.”
Photog credit: Pete Pattisson for The Guardian

16

Walk Free Foundation

THE G20 OBLIGATION

What are G20 governments doing?
The Global Slavery Index assesses governments on
a range of indicators of good practices, including what
they are doing to stop the sourcing of goods or services
linked to modern slavery (Milestone 5). In terms of results
for this milestone in the Government Response Index,
G20 countries achieve an average score of 11 percent,reflecting a range of zero (Argentina, Australia, Canada,
India, Indonesia, Japan, Mexico, Russia, South Africa, Saudi
Arabia, South Korea, and Turkey) to 65 percent (UnitedStates) (Figure 3). Australia has announced it will introduce
supply chain transparency laws in the second half of 2018.
FIGURE 3
Results from Government Response Index to indicators
measuring government efforts to stop sourcing goods
and services produced by forced labour (Milestone 5, %)Brazil

26.7

China

18.3

France18.3

Germany

36.7

Italy

26.7

United Kingdom

26.7

United States

65

Average

11.5

Argentina, Australia, Canada, India, Indonesia, Japan, Mexico, Russia,
South Africa, Saudi Arabia, Korea, Republic of (South Korea), Turkey
0
0

20

40

60

80

Governments stop sourcing goods and services produced by forced labour (Milestone 5, %)Brazil. Men work at disembarking loads of cocoa
beans and pile these onto a truck at the port of Ilhéusin Bahia, Brazil. The material arriving from the Côte
d’Ivoire will be used in the production of chocolate in
the factories located in the south of Bahia.
Photo credit: Joá Souza/Brazil Photo Press/
LatinContent/Getty Images

100

17

18

Walk Free Foundation

Table 1 presents at a glance what governments could or should be doing alongside which policies G20 governments haveso far implemented.
TABLE 1
Summary of government responses to prevent the sourcing of goods or services linked to modern slavery(Milestone 5)
Policies that governments should be implementing

G20 governments which have implemented such policies

IMPORTS
Policies that prevent the import of goods and services madewith forced labour.

United States

Section 307 of the US Tariff Act of 1930.

PUBLIC PROCUREMENT
Guidelines for public procurement officials to prevent use ofmodern slavery in public goods.

Germany 	Guidelines for procurement officials are provided
through the “Municipality Compass.”
United States 	Guidelines are available under Executive Order13627 (2012).

Public procurement policies that explicitly prohibit usingbusinesses suspected of using forced labour / purchasing
products that were made using forced labour.

Brazil 	“Slave Labour Dirty List” prevents thosebusinesses listed on it from tendering for public
contracts.
France 	Ordinance no. 2015-899 of 23 July 2015
relating to public procurement contracts and its
implementing Decree no. 2016-360 of 25 March
2016 (transposition of EU Procurement Directive
2014/24/EU).
Germany 	Part IV of the Restraints of Competition Act(transposition of EU Procurement Directive
2014/24/EU).
Italy 	Legislative Decree no. 50/2016 (transposition of EU
Procurement Directive 2014/24/EU).
United Kingdom 	Public Contracts Regulations 2015 (England andWales); Public Contracts (Scotland) Regulations
2015 (transposition of EU Procurement Directive
2014/24/EU).
United States 	Executive Order 13627 (2012) and Executive Order
13126 (1999).

Annual reports on government action to prevent use offorced labour in public procurement are produced andpublicly available.

None

Government provides training to public procurement officials
on modern slavery.

United States	Training for officials is available under the
Executive Order 13627.

Government takes remedial action where forced labour has
been discovered.

United States	The government is fully implementing Section 307
of the US Tariff Act of 1930 which allows the seizureof goods believed to be produced with forced
labour.
China	The government took remedial action whencases of unpaid wages were discovered in public
contracts.

BUSINESS SUPPLY CHAINSPolicies require businesses to report on their actions tominimise risk of forced labour in their supply chain.

Brazil 		National Pact for Eradication of Slave Labour(voluntary initiative); ”Slave Labour Dirty List” (List
Suja do Trabalho Escravo).
France 		Corporate Duty of Vigilance law; Amendments to
the Law on Accounting PZE No. 51 (transpositionof EU Directive 2014/95/EU).
Germany 		CSR Directive Implementation Act (transpositionof EU Directive 2014/95/EU).
Italy 		Legislative Decree no. 254, 30 December 2016,(transposition of EU Directive 2014/95/EU).
United Kingdom 		Section 54, UK Modern Slavery Act 2015.
United States 		California Transparency in Supply Chains Act 2010.

THE G20 OBLIGATION

19

Table 1 continued.
Policies that governments should be implementing

G20 governments which have implemented such policies

Government creates a public list of businesses that havebeen found to tolerate modern slavery in their supply chains.

Brazil 		“Slave Labour Dirty List” (List Suja do Trabalho
Escravo).
China 		Measures for Publicising Material Violations ofLabour Security; Measures for the Credit Rating
Evaluation of Enterprises in Labour Security
Compliance (not specific to modern slavery).

Company directors who fail to prevent modern slavery and failto undertake reasonable due diligence in first tier supply chain
can be criminally prosecuted.

None

OTHER INITIATIVES
Government identifies risk sectors and takes action to workwith these sectors to eradicate modern slavery.

Italy 		"To work above board" (Campagna informativa"Lavorare alla luce del sole") (agriculture).
Germany 		 Textiles Partnership (textiles).
United Kingdom 		Gangmasters and Labour Abuse Authority(agriculture, horticulture, shellfish gathering, andassociated packaging).
United States 		Section 1502 of the Dodd-Frank Act (conflictminerals: gold, tin, tungsten, and tantalum).

Responsible investment reporting requirement for investment
funds and banks headquartered in the country to ensure thatinvestments do not support modern slavery.

None

As Figure 3 and Table 1 show, G20 governments are taking
steps in the right direction, but there is still much more work
to be done. Among the various potential policy responses toreduce the risk of modern slavery in product supply chains
and industries, the following sections will focus on threeareas of government responses: (1) imports, (2) procurement:
government and business, and (3) ethical recruitment.

Imports
In the US, Section 307 of the Tariff Act of 1930 prohibits
the import of goods produced or manufactured, wholly
or in part, by forced or child labour.27 These goods canbe prevented from entering the US and can be seized by
the federal government. The importing entities can also
face criminal investigation.28 As of November 2017, the US
Customs and Border Protection list of Withhold Release
Orders, which essentially blocks goods from entering thecountry under suspicion that they were made with forced
labour, contained 42 entries.29 The US is the only country
in the world that has such legislation in place.
While not a government response per se, it is relevant
to consider the role of sanctions in proscribing certain
products for import. In the international arena, the United
Nations (UN) has been imposing sanctions on North Korea
for several years, with three rounds of sanctions adopted
in 2017 by the UN Security Council directed at cutting off
revenue to North Korea’s military program.30 The latest UN
sanctions passed under Resolution 2397 (2017) imposed
restrictions on North Korea’s oil, machinery, industrial

equipment, and metals imports as well as on its metal,
agricultural, and labour exports.31 The US government
imposed its own sanctions against seven North Korean
individuals and three entities over human rights abuses,
including forced labour, in October 2017.32
The impact of sanctions is often controversial, becauseeven though sanctions are applied to discourage humanrights abuses, an unintended side effect can include
exacerbating suffering among vulnerable populations.33 In
line with this, it has been noted that the internationalsanctions imposed on North Korea are further exacerbating
the human rights situation in North Korea by impeding thedelivery of humanitarian aid to North Koreans in need.34

Public procurement
Public spending significantly contributes to the global
economy and the G20 governments can thereby exercise
substantial influence over their suppliers and, in turn,over global supply chains. Across OECD countries, public
procurement accounts for about 12 percent of GDP on
average.35 Public procurement commitments under the World
Trade Organization’s Agreement on Public Procurement(GPA) have been estimated at around €1.3 trillion (US$1.6
trillion).36 Table 2 details which G20 governments have
implemented policies to minimise the risk of governmentspurchasing products tainted by forced labour.

20

Walk Free Foundation

TABLE 2
G20 government responses on public procurement:
Status of laws to minimise the risk of modern slavery
in public supply chains
EnactedNot enacted

BrazilArgentina

FranceAustralia

Germany

Canada

Italy

China

United Kingdom

India

United StatesIndonesia

proposes to prevent modern slavery and to certify that no“prohibited” goods or services (including goods produced
through modern slavery) are being supplied in order toaccess government markets.38 These laws aim to ensure
all US government contracts are performed free of humantrafficking and forced labour.
In Brazil, the “Dirty List,” which publicises companies foundto be using modern slavery, is also used by public sector
companies and those listed are prevented from tenderingfor public contracts.39

Japan
MexicoRussiaSaudi Arabia
South Africa
Korea, Republic of (South
Korea)
TurkeyThe US, spending around US$500 billion in government
contracts annually,37 is leading the field in working towardslavery-free public supply chains. Executive Order13627 (2012) and Executive Order 13126 (1999) require
US government contractors to certify that they and theirsubcontractors are taking specific preventive measures
to detect and eliminate trafficking and forced labour intheir supply chains. High-value suppliers are also obliged
to create a compliance plan detailing how the supplier

The European Union (EU) has begun moving toward moresustainable and socially responsible public procurement.
In 2014, the EU Parliament passed Directive 2014/24/EU toencourage European countries to “buy social” by taking into
account social considerations in their public procurement
processes, albeit not particularly targeting supply
chains.40 Article 57 of Directive 2014/24/EU requires thatpublic authorities exclude a business from the procurement
or award procedure if it has been convicted by final
judgment for child labour or human trafficking. The Directive
also recommends integrating social considerations as partof the contract performance conditions, including asking
businesses to comply with the ILO core conventions,such as Convention 29 on forced labour and Convention
182 on worst forms of child labour.41 The requirement of
a conviction under these new EU rules sets a high bar,
given that human rights abuses in supply chains rarely leadto criminal prosecutions, or are never even reported in
the first place.42 Although the requirements of the public
procurement directive are not as far-reaching as legislation,for instance, in the US they nevertheless put pressure on
European governments to move toward more ethical andsustainable public procurement. European countries wererequired to transpose the Directives into national law by
18 April 2016.43 The names of the domestic legislation andtransposition dates by the European members of the G20
are summarised in Table 3.44

TABLE 3National transposition of EU public procurement Directive 2014/24/EU in European G20 countries
FranceGermany

Italy

United Kingdom

Name of national
legislation

Ordinance no. 2015-899
of 23 July 2015 relating
to public
procurement contracts
and its implementing
Decree no. 2016-360 of
25 March 2016

Part IV of the Restraintsof Competition Act

Legislative Decree no.
50/2016

Public Contracts
Regulations 2015
(England and Wales)
Public Contracts(Scotland) Regulations
2015

Transposition date

March 2016

April 2016

April 2016

February 2015
(England and Wales)
December 2015
(Scotland)

THE G20 OBLIGATION﻿

21

Compulsory collective work consisting of cleaning the railway and picking the coal
which fell from a wagon. In North Korea both children and adults are mobilised for
unpaid 'communal labour' in agriculture, road building and construction.
Photo credit: Patrick Aventurier/Gamma-Rapho via Getty Images

In 2016, a private members' bill was introduced, among
other amendments, into the UK House of Lords by Baroness
Young that attempted to extend the reporting requirementin Section 54 of the 2015 Modern Slavery Act to include
all public authorities. After this bill was unsuccessful, asimilar, second private members' bill was introduced byBaroness Young in mid-2017, however, at the time of writing
it has not progressed to a second reading.45 While theseamendments were not passed, it clearly shows there is a
desire in the UK to hold government bodies to the same
reporting requirements as business.46
Germany has also implemented several other measuresdesigned to promote sustainable public procurement.
Since 2010, the Alliance for Sustainable Procurement
has brought together federal, state, and local authorities
to increase the percentage of sustainable goods andservices among purchases by public authorities.47 The
Sustainability Compass (Kompass Nachhaltigkeit) is an
information platform launched by the federal government
to provide information and guidance for German
public authorities on how to incorporate social andenvironmental sustainability criteria into their tendering
procedures.48 Public authorities can exclude economic
operators from participating in a tendering process at

any time if they are aware of any mandatory grounds for
exclusion which include human trafficking, as defined in
Article 2 of EU Directive 2011/36/EU.49
In 2013, Australian Prime Minister Julia Gillard announced
a new government strategy to revise federal procurement
arrangements and guidelines to ensure they assist in
identifying and addressing slavery in supply chains.50 The
subsequent Abbott government expressed support forthis idea but, to date, it is unclear what action was taken to
implement it.51 In March 2017, the Australian government
published the new Commonwealth Procurement Rules(CPRs), which replaced the 2014 version.52 One of the newchanges to the 2017 CPRs is Clause 10.18, which requiresthat officials must make reasonable enquiries to consider
the tenderer’s practices regarding labour regulations andethical employment practices.53 However, the new clausedoes not specifically mention modern slavery or humantrafficking. The final report on Establishing an AustralianModern Slavery Act by the Joint Standing Committee
on Foreign Affairs, Defence and Trade recommended
introducing a new requirement to ensure the Australian
government act as a model leader and procure goods andservices only from businesses that comply with the modern
slavery reporting requirement.54

22

Walk Free Foundation

Business supply chains
In the past two decades there has been a rapid growthin the number of voluntary initiatives focusing on basic
human rights standards and decent working conditions.
Typically, they are sector or regionally based, and driven
by a variety of stakeholders – governments, civil society,and businesses themselves – and sometimes include
certification schemes. However, over the past couple ofyears there has been a move away from voluntary initiatives
toward mandatory reporting laws, such as Section 54 of
the UK Modern Slavery Act, which help to create a levelplaying field for business and ensure that large enterprises
are focused on addressing the complex issue of modern
slavery in their global supply chains. Table 4 shows which
G20 countries have implemented legislation requiring
businesses to report on actions they take to eliminate
modern slavery from their supply chains.
TABLE 4
G20 government responses on business supply chaintransparency: Status of laws requiring business toreport on actions taken to minimise modern slavery
risk in supply chains
EnactedNot enacted

BrazilArgentina

FranceAustralia

Germany

Canada

Italy

China

United Kingdom

India

United StatesIndonesia
Japan
MexicoRussiaSaudi Arabia
South Africa
Korea, Republic of (South
Korea)
TurkeyThe UK Modern Slavery Act (MSA) has been described as a“game changer” for tackling modern slavery and requiringtransparency on modern slavery in supply chains. Section
54 of the MSA requires large businesses to publish anannual statement outlining what they do to ensure there
is no slavery within their own organisation or anywherein their supply chains. While the content of the statement
is not mandated, the UK Home Office provides guidance
for businesses on the reporting requirement of the MSA,
which was updated in October 201755 and applies to every
British or foreign organisation that does business in the
UK and has an annual turnover of more than £36 million(US$50.3 million56). Failure to disclose a statement could
result in injunctive proceedings against the organisationand continued resistance could result in unlimited civil fines.
Although the UK is celebrated for its genuine leadership on
modern slavery globally, the MSA has also drawn criticism,such as from those who point out that the government
has failed to produce a central list of companies that are
required to report. This, together with the rather minimal
reporting requirements (it is possible to release a statement
simply reporting that no action has been taken), makes it
difficult to hold companies to account.57
The California Transparency in Supply Chains Act (2010),
the world’s first mandatory reporting law, became effective
on 1 January 2012.58 While California remains the only
state in the US to have enacted supply chain transparency
legislation, it is itself the world’s sixth largest economy,
home to influential industries located in Silicon Valley and
Hollywood, and accordingly has enormous impact in the US
and globally.59 Businesses covered by the Act must publish
on their websites information about the efforts they maketo eradicate modern slavery from their direct supply chainsfor any tangible goods they offer for sale. However, the law
applies only to retail sellers and manufacturers (whereverincorporated) that do business in California and have global
annual revenues of more than US$100 million.60
In 2017, France adopted the Corporate Duty of Vigilance
law requiring mandatory due diligence for large
businesses.61 The law establishes an obligation for parent
companies to prepare a “vigilance” or due diligenceplan that directly and practically addresses impacts onenvironment, health and security, and human rights(including modern slavery). The scope of the new law
extends to all French companies that have more than 5,000
employees domestically or employ 10,000 employees
worldwide.62 The content of the plan as defined by the law
requires detailed mapping of risks, details of procedures
used to assess risks with suppliers, alert mechanisms tocollect risk information, and a monitoring scheme. Noncompliance with this law may result in court action requiring
compliance and/or requiring a business to compensate
victims who have suffered as a result of its non-compliance.
Initial drafts of the law had proposed civil fines for failure tocomply but these were contested and the fines were notincluded in the final version of the law, as passed. The law
will affect about 150 French businesses.63
In February 2017, the Australian Joint Standing Committee
on Foreign Affairs, Defence and Trade conducted an
inquiry into establishing a Modern Slavery Act in Australia
comparable to the UK MSA 2015.64 In August 2017, theAustralian government announced it will introduce
legislation that will require large businesses to reportannually on their actions taken to address modern
slavery.65 Four months later, the committee released its final
report, which recommended legislation that incorporates
mandatory supply chain reporting for business as well
as a domestic response to modern slavery in Australia,
led by an Australian Anti-Slavery Commissioner. Other
recommendations included greater regulation of labour hireTHE G20 OBLIGATION

companies, measures to tackle orphanage tourism,66 andmodern slavery reporting by the government on its own
supply chains.67 The Australian government has committed
to introducing a bill to Parliament by mid-2018 with the aim
to pass legislation by end of 2018.68 Details of the precise
content of the bill are not yet known.

23

has been criticism about the updating of the list,75as the newversion identified only 68 businesses in contrast to the 609
names listed in 2014 before it was enjoined by the court.76

In 2014, the European Union introduced the EU Directive
2014/95/EU on disclosure of non-financial and diversity
information, which requires large businesses to include in
In Brazil, the 2005 National Pact for the Eradication
management reports a non-financial statement containingof Slave Labour saw signatory companies voluntarily
information relating to social, environmental, and humanagreeing to actively promote decent work practices
rights matters.77 While modern slavery is not expressly
mentioned, it is effectively captured
and to cut commercial ties with thoseunder the category of human rights.
businesses that are on the government’s
The UK Modern Slavery Act In short, businesses are required to“Slave Labour Dirty List” because
they use forced labour in their supply(MSA) has been described as disclose if they have more than 500
chains.69 The response to the Pact was a “game changer” for tackling employees or are a public interest
entity.78 Twenty-seven EU countries,
positive, with more than 450 companies,
modernslaveryandrequiring70
representing almost 30 percent of
excluding Spain, have fully transposedtransparency on modern
Brazil’s GDP, signing onto the Pact by
the Directive into domestic legislation. It
2014.71 The “Slave Labour Dirty List” wasis estimated that the legislation will coverslavery in supply chains.
introduced by the Ministry of Labour andaround 6,000 large companies acrossEmployment in 2004 to publicly “namethe EU.79 Generally, all national laws
and shame” companies that have been found to be profiting
require that company reports cover the following topics:
from slave labour.72 Companies can also be penalised
environmental performance, social and employee matters,
through criminal and commercial sanctions, such as thehuman rights, and corruption and anti-bribery. EU Directives
freezing of assets or denial of government subsidies.73 In
give, however, significant flexibility to member countries
2014, the Supreme Court of Brazil suspended the disclosure
when transposing them domestically. Because of this, theof the Dirty List following a lawsuit filed by the Associação
requirements included in national legislation vary widely
Brasileira de Incorporadoras Imobiliárias (Abrainc), a
across the EU countries. As is described in Table 5, EU
real estate developer’s association representing manymember countries differ in the ways in which they define theorganisations on the list. Abrainc argued the list was
size of an organisation, the type of reporting mechanism,and the penalty which will be imposed upon organisations
unconstitutional as it disrespected the fundamental right tothat fail to report.80
a defence.74 The court allowed the government to resume
publication of the list in March 2017, but since then there24

Walk Free Foundation

TABLE 5
Implementation of EU Directive on non-financial reporting in European G20 countries81
FranceGermany

Italy

United Kingdom

Name of national
legislation

Amendments to the
Law on Accounting PZE
No. 51

CSR Directive
Implementation Act

Legislative Decree no.
254, 30 December 2016

Companies, Partnerships
and Groups (Accounts
and Non-Financial
Reporting) Regulations
2016

Company scopeBusiness with morethan 500 employees
net turnover over €40
million or a balance sheet
total over €20 million
public interest entities
non-listed sociétésanonymes and non-listed
investment funds if they
have a net turnover over€100 million

Business with more than
500 employees net
turnover over €40 million
or a balance sheet total
over €20 million public
interest entities

Business with more than
500 employees net
turnover over €40 million
or a balance sheet total
over €20 million public
interest entities

Business with more than
500 employees public
interest entities

Type of reporting
mechanism

Annual report, within
8 months of the endof financial year, madeavailable on website for
5 years

Management report,
or separate non-financial
report, within 4 months
after the balance sheet
dateManagement report,
or separate report within
deadline of financial
statements, publishedon company register
alongside management
reportStrategic report

Penalties

No fine is imposed
unless an interested
party asks for thedisclosure of the nonfinancial information, if it
is not available, financial
penalties can be
imposed by a judge.

Up to the amount whichis the highest of thefollowing: €10 million or
five percent of the total
annual turnover of thecompany or twice theamount of the profits
gained or losses avoided
because of the breach.

Between €20,000
and €150,000

None

It should be noted that several other European countries
are developing due diligence regulations. This includes theupcoming Dutch Child Labour Due Diligence Law82 and thelatest developments in Switzerland sparked by the Swiss
Responsible Business Initiative (RBI), which is seeking
an amendment to the Swiss Federal Constitution thatwould require companies to conduct mandatory humanrights diligence in line with the UN Guiding Principles. In
response to the RBI, the Legal Affairs Committee of the
Swiss Parliament’s Council of States announced in late 2017that a new bill would be drafted that would make humanrights due diligence mandatory for all large companies andalso for small and medium-sized enterprises operating in
high-risk areas. It is expected that the public referendum
on this proposed legislative amendment will take place
towards the end of 2018 or the beginning of 2019. 83

In a major step forward, the Canadian government
announced on 17 January 2018 that it will create an
independent Canadian Ombudsman for Responsible
Enterprise (CORE). The CORE will be mandated toinvestigate allegations of human rights abuses linked
to Canadian corporate activity abroad and will have thepower to independently investigate, report, recommend,
and remediate, as well as to monitor implementation of
the remedies it imposes. The position’s scope will be multisectoral, initially focusing on the mining, oil and gas, andgarment sectors, but it is expected that it will be extended
to other business sectors. The Canadian government
also announced plans to establish an Advisory Board on
Responsible Business Conduct to advise the government
and the CORE on responsible business conduct abroad.84

THE G20 OBLIGATION

25

Ethical recruitment
Global supply chains entail the buying of goods but also
the purchase of labour. In our globalised world, millions of
so-called economic migrants are leaving their countries
to seek work elsewhere. Remittances from migrant labour
contribute strongly to the GDP of many developing
countries. For the purpose of preventing and eliminating
modern slavery, there needs to be a particular focus ofattention on migrant workers, especially those working in
the low-skilled, informal, or seasonal sectors as they are
generally more vulnerable due to a combination of factors,
including linguistic barriers, financial pressure, or limited
knowledge of their local rights.85 Their situation is often
exacerbated by the available migration frameworks that

may offer only limited options for safe migration. Many of
the issues connected to exploitation of migrant workers
are rooted in practices that trap workers in bonded labourtype situations that they are unable to leave. Some of themost fundamental practices increasing the vulnerabilityof workers assessed under the Global Slavery Index’s
Government Responses Index include the charging ofrecruitment fees to workers and the lack of labour law
protection for migrant workers and those working invulnerable sectors. Accordingly, while businesses have arole to play, it is essential that governments take action to
improve conditions for migrant workers by enforcing ethicalrecruitment and labour protections.86

TABLE 6
G20 government responses concerning recruitment fees

Laws implemented to prevent
fees charged to employee

No federal legislation,individual state laws enacted

Fees capped at certain
amounts or according tocertain conditions

No laws implemented

BrazilCanadaGermany

Argentina

Italy

United States

India

Australia

Japan

China

South Africa
United Kingdom

FranceIndonesia
MexicoRussiaSaudi Arabia
Korea, Republic of(South Korea)
TurkeyTable 6 groups the various policy responses of G20
countries on charging of recruitment fees to workers87 into
four different categories. Some countries have legislationprohibiting recruitment fees that are charged to theemployee. For example, the UK’s Employment Agencies
Act 1973, Section 6, prohibits employment agencies fromcharging recruitment fees to the workers for finding or trying
to find them employment.88 Since 2005, the UK has also
had a licensing scheme to regulate businesses that provide
workers to the agriculture, horticulture, shellfish gathering,and processing and packaging sectors.89 The Gangmasters
and Labour Abuse Authority (GLAA, formerly known as theGangmasters Licensing Authority) is a non-departmental
public body that assesses third-party employment agencies
to ensure they meet certain standards with regard toworkers receiving fair treatment and being legitimately
employed.90 In mid-2017, the GLAA’s role was broadened tomore effectively combat modern slavery across the entire
labour market (i.e. including sectors that are not subject to
GLAA licensing91). GLAA officers now have new police-style
powers that allow them to carry out arrests (rather thanrefer offenders on to the police) and to search for and seize
evidence of labour offences.92
In two G20 countries, Canada and the United States,
policies prohibiting recruitment fees charged to theemployee exist in certain states and provinces but are notfederally legislated.
Another group of G20 countries allows the charging ofrecruitment fees to the employee but caps the amountaccording to certain conditions. For example, in Germany,
paragraph 296 of the German Social Code of Law(Sozialgesetzbuch) states that when using a private
recruitment agency, the job seeker enters into a contract withthe agency. If the agency finds employment for the job seeker,
the job seeker is required to pay a fee to the recruitment
agency, as per the contract. This fee is generally capped at€2,000 (US$2,48093) and at €150 (US$18594) for au pair jobs.95
The Japanese government prohibits the charging ofrecruitment fees to the employee under Article 6 of theLabour Standards Act, with the Labour Standards Inspection
Offices conducting inspections to ensure compliance.96

26

Walk Free Foundation

Recruitment agencies, however, are governed by the
Employment Security Act (Article 32-3), which allows licensed
recruitment agencies to collect fees from job seekers inspecial cases, such as when “collection of a fee from a job
seeker is found to be necessary for the interest of said job
seeker.”97 These provisions are also applicable to migrant
workers if they use agencies based in Japan to either findthem work in Japan or make arrangements for them to cometo work there.98
India’s Employment (Amendment) Rules 2009 states that
recruitment agents can charge fees to the employee butthat they must be limited to 45 days' wages or a maximumof 20,000 Indian Rupees (US$312 99).100 Overcharging
and abuses within this system are, however, common
and well documented.101 The Ministry of External Affairs
launched an eMigrate online foreign worker recruitment
system in 2015 102 in an effort to make the system“safer, more orderly and humane,”103 through ensuring
foreign employers and recruiters comply with relevant
regulations. However, widespread abuses confirm thatcompliance remains an issue.104
Half the G20 countries have not implemented any laws to
make sure that workers are not charged any recruitment
fees. Australia does not have a federal policy that explicitly
prohibits charging of fees to the employee as a payment for
labour supply services or facilitating migration. Although the
Fair Work Act 2009 specifies that companies hiring throughlabour hire agencies pay the labour hire agency (the “on-hirebusiness”) a fee for their recruitment services, it does not
specifically prohibit recruitment fees from being charged
to the employee.105 There are some existing regulatory
frameworks for labour hire firms and recruitment agencies,
however these differ largely among Australia’s states andterritories.106 Also, it is uncertain whether and how these laws
can be enforced with regard to overseas agents or brokers.107
China does not have a comprehensive legislative
framework prohibiting recruitment fees from being charged
to the employee, but China’s legal framework does include
some unique features focused on protecting workers in theinformal economy and those who are engaged throughrecruiters.108 In 2008, China enacted a Labour Contract Law
in an effort to formalise all employment relations.109 This
gave workers robust protection and made contracts
compulsory for all workers.110 An amendment made to
the law in 2013 allows for greater protection of workers
who are employed through a recruitment agency. The
revisions require employers to hire the majority of theirworkforce directly in order to restrict the number of workers
engaged through recruiters. The amendment guarantees
contract workers the same rights as their directly-employedcounterparts, such as the required social benefits(including pensions, health insurance, and unemployment
benefits)111 and payment of their full wage.112
Once migrant workers have been recruited, it is importantthat they are provided with safeguards that ensure decent
working conditions. This should include protection underdomestic labour laws, regardless of industry or specificcharacteristic of their work arrangements (such as nothaving a written contract). Table 7 classifies the legal
protections afforded to workers across the G20 countries.
Nine G20 countries have labour laws that cover all workers(national and foreign workers). While such legislation exists
in Indonesia, in practice, domestic workers are unable
to access the protections these laws afford. As for the
majority of G20 countries, certain sectors are not coveredby national labour law. Table 7 details which sectors are
excluded in each of those countries.

TABLE 7
G20 government responses on equal labour laws
Labour laws cover all workers

Labour laws exclude workers in certain sectors

Argentina

Australia (domestic workers excluded in one state)

BrazilGermany (domestic workers and domestic workers of diplomats
excluded)

CanadaIndia (domestic workers excluded)

China

Italy (employees of companies with fewer than 15 workers anddomestic workers excluded)

FranceJapan (domestic workers and those in informal sectors excluded)

Indonesia

Russia (employees of companies connected with 2018 World Cup
excluded from labour law)

MexicoKorea, Republic of (South Korea) (domestic workers excluded)

South Africa

Turkey (multiple sectors excluded)

United Kingdom

United States (domestic workers excluded from laws to unionise
and from protections when working in the private home of a family)
Saudi Arabia (migrant workers, domestic workers and seafarers
excluded)THE G20 OBLIGATION

Police showed some evidence of human trafficking crimes duringa press conference at the Indonesian National Police Criminal
Investigation Agency Office, Jakarta, August, 2017. The Indonesian
Police’s Special Task Force on Human Trafficking, successfully
dismantled international human trafficking syndicates, which weretrafficking individuals to the Middle East, in particular Syria and Abu
Dhabi in the UAE. A total of eight suspects were arrested, and dozens
of passports, visas, and other documents were confiscated as evidence.
Police also managed to rescue some of the victims who were going to
be sent to Syria and Abu Dhabi; one of them was a 14-year-old girl.
Photo credit: Aditya Irawan/NurPhoto via Getty Images

27

28

Walk Free Foundation

ARGENTINA

Importing country
Source country

Top 5 imported products at risk of modern slavery

ELECTRONICS†GARMENTS

TIMBERFISH

CARPETSJapanSouth Korea

China
Pakistan
Vietnam
India
Thailand

Malaysia
Indonesia
Peru
BrazilArgentina

Breakdown of at-risk imported products by source country (annually, in thousands of US$)*^446,274

China
20,925

Malaysia

157,343

China
Vietnam

22,792

India

21,809Thailand

5,470

Malaysia

4,397

Brazil3,315
34,219BrazilPeru

110
20,225ThailandIndonesia

74

South Korea

6

Japan

4

India

2,253

Pakistan

17

Argentina’s at-risk imported products,of overall at-risk imports by G20 countries.^

US$739m/US$354b†Applies to laptops, computers and mobile phones only

*see Appendix 3
in the Global Slavery Index, available fordownload at www.globalslaveryindex.org^This relates to the top 5 at-risk imports

29

THE G20 OBLIGATIONAUSTRALIA

Importing country
Source country

Top 5 imported products at risk of modern slavery

ELECTRONICS†GARMENTS

FISH

RICE

COCOA

RussiaSouth Korea

Japan

China

Vietnam
India

Côte d’Ivoire

TaiwanThailand

Ghana
Malaysia
Indonesia

BrazilAustralia
Argentina

Breakdown of at-risk imported products by source country (annually, in thousands of US$)*^
China

6,671,902

Malaysia

351,283

China

4,091,699

India

167,223

Vietnam

166,564

Thailand

74,705

Malaysia

17,180BrazilArgentina

2,462
177

Thailand

223,118

Indonesia

49,675

China

47,346

Taiwan40,250

Japan

5,629

South Korea

1,809

Russia

277

Ghana

3

India

40,625

Côte d’Ivoire

18,146

Ghana

4,412

†Applies to laptops, computers and mobile phones only

Australia’s at-risk imported products,of overall at-risk imports by G20 countries.^

US$12b/US$354b*see Appendix 3
in the Global Slavery Index, available fordownload at www.globalslaveryindex.org^This relates to the top 5 at-risk imports

30

Walk Free Foundation

BRAZIL

Importing country
Source country

Top 5 imported products at risk of modern slavery

GARMENTSELECTRONICS†FISH

CATTLE

COCOA

Japan
South Korea

China

TaiwanVietnam
India

Côte d'Ivoire

Thailand

Ghana
Malaysia
Indonesia

BrazilParaguay

Argentina

Breakdown of at-risk imported products by source country (annually, in thousands of US$)*^
China

1,495,047

India

147,849

Vietnam

95,044

Argentina

26,739Thailand

21,442

Malaysia

9,950

China

786,722

Malaysia

45,386

China

179,143

Thailand20, 449

Taiwan11,372

Japan

1,268

Indonesia

112

South Korea

102

Paraguay

124,435

Ghana

32,537

Côte d’Ivoire

25,107†Applies to laptops, computers and mobile phones only

Brazil’s at-risk imported products,of overall at-risk imports by G20 countries.^

US$3b/US$354b*see Appendix 3
in the Global Slavery Index, available fordownload at www.globalslaveryindex.org^This relates to the top 5 at-risk imports

THE G20 OBLIGATIONCANADA

Importing country
Source country

Top 5 imported products at risk of modern slavery

ELECTRONICS†

31

GARMENTS

GOLD

FISH

SUGARCANE

RussiaCanadaJapan
South Korea
China
TaiwanVietnam

Domincan Republic

India

Thailand

Ghana
Malaysia
Indonesia

Peru

BrazilArgentina

Breakdown of at-risk imported products by source country (annually, in thousands of US$)*^7,552,860

China
Malaysia

67,534

China

3,723,363

Vietnam

628,708

India

291,598

Thailand

64,903

Malaysia

33,880Brazil954

Argentina

66

Peru

1,584,163

China

192,932

ThailandTaiwan144,062
15,301

Russia11,456

Indonesia

11,117

Japan

10,916South Korea

5,661

Ghana

289

BrazilDominican Republic

243,305
4†Applies to laptops, computers and mobile phones only

Canada’s at-risk imported products,of overall at-risk imports by G20 countries.^

US$15b/US$354b*see Appendix 3
in the Global Slavery Index, available fordownload at www.globalslaveryindex.org^This relates to the top 5 at-risk imports

32

Walk Free Foundation

CHINA

Importing country
Source country

Top 5 imported products at risk of modern slavery

ELECTRONICS†

FISH

COAL

GARMENTSSUGARCANE

RussiaNorth Korea Japan
South Korea

China

TaiwanVietnam
India

Thailand

Malaysia
Indonesia

BrazilArgentina

Breakdown of at-risk imported products by source country (annually, in thousands of US$)*^
Malaysia

1,602,835

Russia937,468

Taiwan153,250South Korea

137,335

Japan

90,305Indonesia

78,449Thailand

61,166

North Korea

954,000

Vietnam

621,114

India

91,383Thailand
Malaysia

83,97024,610Argentina

595

Brazil

162

Brazil755,999

China’s at-risk imported products,of overall at-risk imports by G20 countries.^

US$6b/US$354b†Applies to laptops, computers and mobile phones only

*see Appendix 3
in the Global Slavery Index, available fordownload at www.globalslaveryindex.org^This relates to the top 5 at-risk imports

THE G20 OBLIGATIONFRANCE

33

Importing country
Source country

Top 5 imported products at risk of modern slavery

GARMENTSELECTRONICS†

COCOA

FISH

TIMBER

RussiaFranceJapan
South Korea

China

TaiwanVietnam
India

Côte d’Ivoire

Thailand

Ghana
Malaysia
Indonesia

Peru
BrazilArgentina

Breakdown of at-risk imported products by source country (annually, in thousands of US$)*^
China

6,418,827

India

1,041,238

VietnamThailand
MalaysiaBrazilArgentina

578,992
149,432
38,178
3,377
53

China
Malaysia

7,036,778
36,767

Côte d’Ivoire
Ghana455, 281
156,518

China

183,007

Ghana

77,184

Russia43,011

South Korea

39,649Thailand

29,654

Indonesia

18,042

Taiwan

3,136

Japan

1,088

Brazil

84,504

Peru

6,499

†Applies to laptops, computers and mobile phones only

France’s at-risk imported products,of overall at-risk imports by G20 countries.^

US$16b/US$354b*see Appendix 3
in the Global Slavery Index, available fordownload at www.globalslaveryindex.org^This relates to the top 5 at-risk imports

34

Walk Free Foundation

GERMANY

Importing country
Source country

Top 5 imported products at risk of modern slavery

ELECTRONICS†GARMENTS

COCOA

FISH

TIMBER

RussiaGermany

Japan
South Korea

China

Vietnam
India

Côte d'Ivoire

TaiwanThailand

Ghana
Malaysia
Indonesia

Peru
BrazilArgentina

Breakdown of at-risk imported products by source country (annually, in thousands of US$)*^
China
Malaysia

16,646,149
254,738

China

8,803,808

India

1,384,465

VietnamThailand
MalaysiaBrazilArgentina
Côte d’Ivoire
Ghana
China
Russia1,041,373
148,479
72,5491,290
28488,827
127,566
428,976
31,166

Indonesia

21,274Thailand

19,010South Korea

4,499

Japan

4,029

Taiwan

3,210

Ghana

2,607

Brazil

86,760Peru

537†Applies to laptops, computers and mobile phones only

Germany’s at-risk imported products,of overall at-risk imports by G20 countries.^

US$30b/US$354b*see Appendix 3
in the Global Slavery Index, available fordownload at www.globalslaveryindex.org^This relates to the top 5 at-risk imports

THE G20 OBLIGATION

INDIA

35

Importing country
Source country

Top 5 imported products at risk of modern slavery

ELECTRONICS†

SUGARCANEGOLDGARMENTSDIAMONDS

North Korea
China

India

VietnamThailand

Malaysia

Peru

AngolaBrazilBreakdown of at-risk imported products by source country (annually, in thousands of US$)*^
China

8,113,175

Malaysia

225,756

Brazil456,472Peru

363,777

North Korea

18

China

336,038

Thailand

9,902

Vietnam

9,738

Malaysia

4,338

Brazil28

Angola97,062

India’s at-risk imported products,of overall at-risk imports by G20 countries.^

US$10b/US$354b†Applies to laptops, computers and mobile phones only

*see Appendix 3
in the Global Slavery Index, available fordownload at www.globalslaveryindex.org^This relates to the top 5 at-risk imports

36

Walk Free Foundation

INDONESIA

Importing country
Source country

Top 5 imported products at risk of modern slavery

ELECTRONICS†GARMENTSFISHSUGARCANE

COCOA

Japan
South Korea

China

Vietnam
India

Côte d’Ivoire

TaiwanThailand

Malaysia

Indonesia

BrazilBreakdown of at-risk imported products by source country (annually, in thousands of US$)*^1,557,687

China
100,206

Malaysia

738,729

China
Malaysia

23,472

Vietnam

11,305Thailand

7,330

India

6,926

China
Taiwan101,778
50,641

Japan

17,940Thailand

4,835South Korea

1,880

BrazilCôte d’Ivoire

117,879
46,078Indonesia’s at-risk imported products,of overall at-risk imports by G20 countries.^

US$3b/US$354b†Applies to laptops, computers and mobile phones only

*see Appendix 3
in the Global Slavery Index, available fordownload at www.globalslaveryindex.org^This relates to the top 5 at-risk imports

THE G20 OBLIGATION

ITALY

37

Importing country
Source country

Top 5 imported products at risk of modern slavery

GARMENTSELECTRONICS†

COCOA

CATTLEFISH

Russia

Italy

Japan
South Korea

China

TaiwanVietnam
India

Côte d’Ivoire

Thailand

Ghana
Malaysia
Indonesia

BrazilParaguay
Argentina

Breakdown of at-risk imported products by source country (annually, in thousands of US$)*^
China

3,203,516

India

379,242

VietnamThailand

213,159
38,604

Malaysia

8,521

Brazil

1,965

Argentina

53

China
Malaysia

2,830,742
2,425

Côte d’Ivoire
Ghana

168,696
58,575

BrazilParaguay
China

222,628
2,526
56,179Thailand

47,712Indonesia

41,424South Korea

22,219Ghana

14,709Taiwan8,096

Russia

1,053

Japan

877

†Applies to laptops, computers and mobile phones only

Italy’s at-risk imported products,of overall at-risk imports by G20 countries^.

US$7b/US$354b*see Appendix 3
in the Global Slavery Index, available fordownload at www.globalslaveryindex.org^This relates to the top 5 at-risk imports

38

Walk Free Foundation

JAPAN

Importing country
Source country

Top 5 imported products at risk of modern slavery

ELECTRONICS†GARMENTS

FISH

COCOA

TIMBER

RussiaChina

Vietnam
India

Côte d’Ivoire

South Korea

Japan

TaiwanThailand

Ghana
Malaysia
Indonesia

Peru
BrazilArgentina

Breakdown of at-risk imported products by source country (annually, in thousands of US$)*^
China
Malaysia

22,145,679
245,182

China

17,050,285

Vietnam

2,776,670

Thailand438,320

India

227,060

MalaysiaBrazilArgentina

108,725
2,863
959

China

1,512,309

Thailand

451,197

Taiwan442,238

South Korea

369,356

Russia320,058

Indonesia
Ghana

224,319
2,915

Ghana

110,615

Côte d’Ivoire

12,920Brazil

96,184

Peru

293†Applies to laptops, computers and mobile phones only

Japan’s at-risk imported products,of overall at-risk imports by G20 countries.^

US$47b/US$354b*see Appendix 3
in the Global Slavery Index, available fordownload at www.globalslaveryindex.org^This relates to the top 5 at-risk imports

39

THE G20 OBLIGATIONMEXICO

Importing country
Source country

Top 5 imported products at risk of modern slavery

ELECTRONICS†GARMENTSFISH

TIMBER

COCOA

Japan
China

South Korea

TaiwanMexicoVietnam

India

ThailandCôte d’Ivoire

Ghana
Malaysia
Indonesia

Peru
BrazilArgentina

Breakdown of at-risk imported products by source country (annually, in thousands of US$)*^
China
Malaysia

7,787,135
225,563

China

1,230,424

Vietnam

180,205

India

176,320

Malaysia

13,033Thailand

8,576

Argentina

4,401

Brazil

1,690

China

189,636

Indonesia

10,782

Japan

2,756

Taiwan2,628South Korea

1,313

Thailand

653

Brazil143,162Peru

30,858Côte d’Ivoire

50,939Ghana

650†Applies to laptops, computers and mobile phones only

Mexico’s at-risk imported products,of overall at-risk imports by G20 countries.^

US$10b/US$354b*see Appendix 3
in the Global Slavery Index, available fordownload at www.globalslaveryindex.org^This relates to the top 5 at-risk imports

40

Walk Free Foundation

RUSSIA

Importing country
Source country

Top 5 imported products at risk of modern slavery

ELECTRONICS†GARMENTSCATTLESUGARCANE

FISH

Russia

Japan
China

Vietnam
India

South Korea

TaiwanThailand

Malaysia
Indonesia

BrazilParaguay

Argentina

Breakdown of at-risk imported products by source country (annually, in thousands of US$)*^
China

3,833,771

Malaysia

50,923

China

2,713,472

Vietnam

144,392

India
Thailand
MalaysiaBrazilArgentina

140,659
16,906
9,274
425
4

Brazil566,803

Paraguay

350,720

BrazilChina

321,834
177,819

Thailand

36,122indonesia

11,564

Japan

10,331

Taiwan8,465South Korea

5,058†Applies to laptops, computers and mobile phones only

Russia’s at-risk imported products,of overall at-risk imports by G20 countries.^

US$8b/US$354b*see Appendix 3
in the Global Slavery Index, available fordownload at www.globalslaveryindex.org^This relates to the top 5 at-risk imports

41

THE G20 OBLIGATIONSAUDI ARABIA

Importing country
Source country

Top 5 imported products at risk of modern slavery

GARMENTSELECTRONICS†

RICE

FISH

SUGARCANE

China

Saudi Arabia
Vietnam
India

Japan
South Korea

TaiwanThailand

Malaysia
Indonesia

BrazilArgentina

Breakdown of at-risk imported products by source country (annually, in thousands of US$)*^
China

1,866,408

India

405,612

Vietnam

51,142Thailand

24,404

Malaysia

11,155

Brazil768

Argentina

15

China
Malaysia

1,963,891
28,724India

1,080,016

ThailandIndonesia

123,51162,376

Taiwan18,791

Japan

11,211

China

3,172

South Korea

2,028

BrazilSaudi Arabia’s at-risk imported products,of overall at-risk imports by G20 countries.^
184,548†Applies to laptops, computers and mobile phones only

US$6b/US$354b*see Appendix 3
in the Global Slavery Index, available fordownload at www.globalslaveryindex.org^This relates to the top 5 at-risk imports

42

Walk Free Foundation

SOUTH KOREA

Importing country
Source country

Top 5 imported products at risk of modern slavery

ELECTRONICS†GARMENTS

FISH

COCOA

TIMBER

RussiaJapan
South Korea

China

Vietnam

India

TaiwanThailandCôte d’Ivoire

Ghana
Malaysia
Indonesia

Peru
BrazilArgentina

Breakdown of at-risk imported products by source country (annually, in thousands of US$)*^
China
Malaysia

6,979,552
54,313China

3,645,332

Vietnam2,181,292

Thailand

71,944

India

59,181

Malaysia

8,986

Brazil319

Argentina

131

China

613,889

Russia508,892

Taiwan93,711

Japan

76,388Thailand

44,531Indonesia

33,290

Ghana

52

Ghana

16,505

Côte d’Ivoire

409

Brazil

14,897

Peru

1,779

†Applies to laptops, computers and mobile phones only

South Korea’s at-risk imported products,of overall at-risk imports by G20 countries.^

US$14b/US$354b*see Appendix 3
in the Global Slavery Index, available fordownload at www.globalslaveryindex.org^This relates to the top 5 at-risk imports

THE G20 OBLIGATIONTURKEY

Importing country
Source country

Top 5 imported products at risk of modern slavery

ELECTRONICS†

43

GARMENTS

COCOA

COTTON

RICE

Kazakhstan
TurkeyUzbekistan Tajikistan
Turkmenistan

India

China

MyanmarVietnamThailandCôte d’ivoire

Ghana
MalaysiaBrazilArgentina

Breakdown of at-risk imported products by source country (annually, in thousands of US$)*^
China
Malaysia

3,286,769
18,514

China

694,144

India

87,433

Vietnam

66,246

Thailand

10,415

Malaysia

9,698

Brazil266

Argentina

39

Côte d’Ivoire

231,487

Ghana

147,274

Turkmenistan
Tajikistan

207,998
32,362

Uzbekistan

10,622

Kazakhstan

1,034

India
Myanmar33,000288†Applies to laptops, computers and mobile phones only

Turkey’s at-risk imported products,of overall at-risk imports by G20 countries.^

US$5b/US$354b*see Appendix 3
in the Global Slavery Index, available fordownload at www.globalslaveryindex.org^This relates to the top 5 at-risk imports

44

Walk Free Foundation

UNITED KINGDOM

Importing country
Source country

Top 5 imported products at risk of modern slavery

GARMENTSELECTRONICS†

FISH

COCOA

RICE

RussiaUnited Kingdom

Japan
South Korea

China

Myanmar
India

Côte d’Ivoire

VietnamTaiwanThailand

Ghana
Malaysia
Indonesia

BrazilArgentina

Breakdown of at-risk imported products by source country (annually, in thousands of US$)*^7,298,820

China
India

1,858,359

VietnamThailand
MalaysiaBrazilArgentina

745,491
88,89042,100
1,125
57

China
Malaysia

7,996,205
58,791

China

227,449

Ghana

88,377

Thailand

75,037

Russia51,306

Indonesia

32,563

Japan

4,068

South Korea

798

Taiwan626

Côte d’Ivoire
Ghana
India
Myanmar208,321
77,410172,921
4,303†Applies to laptops, computers and mobile phones only

United Kingdom’s at-risk imported products,of overall at-risk imports by G20 countries.^

US$18b/US$354b*see Appendix 3
in the Global Slavery Index, available fordownload at www.globalslaveryindex.org^This relates to the top 5 at-risk imports

45

THE G20 OBLIGATIONUNITED STATES

Importing country
Source country

Top 5 imported products at risk of modern slavery

ELECTRONICS†GARMENTS

FISH

COCOA

TIMBER

RussiaUnited States

Japan
South Korea

China

Vietnam
India

Côte d’Ivoire

TaiwanThailand

Ghana
Malaysia
Indonesia

Peru
BrazilArgentina

Breakdown of at-risk imported products by source country (annually, in thousands of US$)*^89,490,687

China
Malaysia

1,546,001
30,468,913

China
11,258,322

Vietnam

3,855,523

India
Thailand

1,079,637

Malaysia

564,210

BrazilArgentina
China
ThailandIndonesiaJapan

19,337316
1,983,840
535,025
322,695
169,315

Taiwan136,624

South Korea

101,293

Russia34,876Ghana

121

Côte d’Ivoire

981,623Ghana

218,650

Brazil843,306Peru

22,402†Applies to laptops, computers and mobile phones only

United States’s at-risk imported products,of overall at-risk imports by G20 countries.^

US$144b/US$354b*see Appendix 3
in the Global Slavery Index, available fordownload at www.globalslaveryindex.org^This relates to the top 5 at-risk imports

46

Walk Free Foundation

A Brief History1 20 Hangzouh 2016, G20 Leaders’ Communique, 4-5 September,G
Available from: https://www.g20.org/profiles/g20/modules/custom/g20_beverly/img/timeline/China/2016-09-04-g20-comunique-en.pdf [27August 2018].

2

 20 Germany 2017, G20 Leader’s Declaration: Shaping anGinterconnected world, 7-8 July. Available from http://www.g20.utoronto.
ca/2017/2017-G20-leaders-declaration.pdf [27 August 2018].

3

 20 Germany 2017 & German Federal Ministry of Labour and Social
G
Affairs 2017, Towards an Inclusive Future: Shaping the World of Work: G20
Labour and Employment Ministers Meeting 2017. Available from: http://
www.g20.utoronto.ca/2017/g20-labour-ministerial-declaration.pdf [27August 2018].

Importing Risk
1

This list does not claim to be exhaustive. The data are taken fromthe BACI 2015 dataset (available from: http://www.cepii.fr/cepii/en/
bdd_modele/presentation.asp?id=1). For a detailed methodology of how
these products were identified, please see Appendix 3. South Africa was
excluded as it does not report trade data individually but only throughthe Southern African Customs Union, which comprises five countriesof Southern Africa (South Africa, Botswana, Namibia, Lesotho, andSwaziland). The European Union was also excluded as much of its tradeis already captured in the data of Germany, Italy, France, and the UK.

2

United Nations Human Rights Office of the High Commissioner 2011,
Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights, United Nations.
Available from: http://www.ohchr.org/Documents/Publications/
GuidingPrinciplesBusinessHR_EN.pdf. [13 December 2017].

3

4

Essays1

 ith the permission of Sharan Burrow, this is a reprinted version of her
W
Foreword from the Business & Human Rights Resource Centre report“Modern Slavery in Company Operations and Supply Chains: Mandatory
Transparency, Mandatory Due Diligence, and Public Procurement Due
Diligence” commissioned by the International Trade Union Confederation
with support from Friedrich Ebert Stiftung. The report is available
from: https://www.ituc-csi.org/IMG/pdf/modern_slavery_in_company_
operation_and_supply_chain_final.pdf [27 August 2018].

5

6

7

8

9

United Nations n.d., Sustainable Development Goal 8. Available from:https://sustainabledevelopment.un.org/sdg8. [11 January 2018].
Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade n.d., The G20, AustralianGovernment. Available from: http://dfat.gov.au/international-relations/international-organisations/g20/pages/the-g20.aspx. [11 January 2018].
Observatory of Economic Complexity 2016, China. Available from: https://atlas.media.mit.edu/en/profile/country/chn/. [11 December 2017].
Observatory of Economic Complexity 2016, United States. Available from:https://atlas.media.mit.edu/en/profile/country/usa/. [11 December 2017].
G20 Germany 2017, G20 Leaders´ Declaration: Shaping an interconnectedworld, 7/8 July. Available from: https://www.bundesregierung.de/Content/DE/_Anlagen/2017/07/2017-07-08-abschlusserklaerung-g20eng.pdf;jsessionid=37894E0F4F0E033822BB3B168D1228B4.s1t1?__
blob=publicationFile&v=14. [19 December 2017]. International Corporate
Accountability Roundtable 2017, G20 Progress Report: G20 Leaders
Commit to More Sustainable and Inclusive Global Supply Chains—MoreWork Remains to Be Done, 18 July. Available from: https://www.icar.ngo/
news/2017/7/18/g20-progress-report-g20-leaders-commit-to-moresustainable-and-inclusive-global-supply-chainsmore-work-remains-to-bedone. [17 December 2017].
G20 Germany 2017, G20 Leaders´ Declaration:
Shaping an interconnected world, 7/8 July. Available
from: https://www.bundesregierung.de/Content/DE/_
Anlagen/2017/07/2017-07-08-abschlusserklaerung-g20-eng.
pdf;jsessionid=37894E0F4F0E033822BB3B168D1228B4.s1t1?__
blob=publicationFile&v=14. [19 December 2017].
Bureau of International Labor Affairs 2016, List of Goods Producedby Child Labor or Forced Labor, United States Department of Labor.
Available from: https://www.dol.gov/sites/default/files/documents/ilab/
reports/child-labor/findings/TVPRA_Report2016.pdf. [12 January 2018].

10

In the case of the maritime fishing industry, countries in this list refer toflag states, i.e. countries where a vessel is registered. Ghana fishing risk
relates to inland fisheries (mainly Lake Volta).

11

The data are taken from the BACI 2015 dataset. Available from: http://
www.cepii.fr/cepii/en/bdd_modele/presentation.asp?id=1). [12 January2018].

12

International Labour Organization (ILO) & Walk Free Foundation 2017,
Global estimates of modern slavery: Forced labour and forced marriage,
p.32. Available from: https://www.alliance87.org/global_estimates_of_modern_slavery-forced_labour_and_forced_marriage.pdf.
[18 January 2017].

13

14

Observatory of Economic Complexity 2015, Where does North Korea
export Coal Briquettes to? (2015). Available from: https://atlas.media.mit.
edu/en/visualize/tree_map/hs92/export/prk/show/2701/2015/.
[6 February 2018].
Breuker, R & van Gardingen, I [Forthcoming], Pervasive, punitive andpredetermined: Understanding modern slavery in North Korea. KwangJin, K 2016, Gulag, Inc: The Use of Forced Labor in North Korea’s Export
Industries, Committee for Human Rights in North Korea. Available from:https://www.hrnk.org/uploads/pdfs/KKJ_Gulag_INC_FinalFinal_WEB.pdf.
[6 February 2018].

THE G20 OBLIGATION

15

Tickler, D, Bryant, K, David, F, Forrest, J A, Gordon, E, Larsen, J J,
Meeuwig, J, Oh, B, Pauly, D, Sumaila, U R and Zeller, D, Common causes,
shared solutions: The relationship between modern slavery and the race
to fish, [undergoing review for publication].

16

For more details, please refer to the product bibliography in the Appendix 4.

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

Statista 2017, World cocoa production by country from 2012/2013 to
2016/2017 (in 1,000 metric tons). Available from: https://www.statista.com/
statistics/263855/cocoa-bean-production-worldwide-by-region/.
[15 December 2017].
Gross, A S 2017, 'Brazil ordered to pay $5m to workers formerly enslavedon cattle ranch,' The Guardian, 10 January. Available from: https://www.
theguardian.com/global-development/2017/jan/09/brazil-ordered-to-pay5m-to-workers-formerly-enslaved-on-cattle-ranch. [12 January 2018].
United Nations Human Rights Office of the High Commissioner 2014,
Report of the Special Rapporteur on contemporary forms of slavery,
including its causes and consequences, Gulnara Shahinian: Follow-up
mission to Kazakhstan, United Nations Human Rights Council, Twentyseventh session. Available from: http://www.ohchr.org/EN/HRBodies/
HRC/RegularSessions/Session27/Documents/A_HRC_27_53_Add_2_
ENG.doc. [9 February 2018]. United Nations Human Rights Committee
2016, Concluding observations on the second periodic report ofKazakhstan, United Nations. Available from: http://tbinternet.ohchr.
org/_layouts/treatybodyexternal/Download.aspx?symbolno=CCPR/C/
KAZ/CO/2&Lang=En. [8 February 2018].
Amnesty International 2017, Turkmenistan 2016/2017. Available from:https://www.amnesty.org/en/countries/europe-and-central-asia/
turkmenistan/report-turkmenistan/. [9 February 2018]. International
Labour Organization Committee of Experts 2017, Observation (CEACR)– adopted 2016, published 106th ILC session (2017) Abolition of Forced
Labour Convention, 1957 (No. 105) - Turkmenistan (Ratification: 1997),
International Labour Organization. Available from: http://www.ilo.org/
dyn/normlex/en/f?p=NORMLEXPUB:13100:0::::P13100_COMMENT_
ID:3297278. [8 February 2018].
Scarborough, I M 2014. Child, Student, and Adult Participation in
Tajikistan’s Cotton Harvest: 2013 Annual Assessment. International
Organization for Migration. Available from: http://publications.iom.
int/system/files/pdf/tajikistan_cotton_2013annualassessment_final.
pdf. [9 February 2018]. Scarborough, I M 2016, Child and forced labour
exploitation in Tajikistan's cotton harvest: 2015 annual monitoring report,
International Organization for Migration. Available from: http://www.iom.tj/
files/cottoneng2015.pdf. [20 February 2018].
Office to Monitor and Combat Trafficking in Persons 2017, Tajikistan
Country Narrative, United States Department of State. Available from:https://www.state.gov/j/tip/rls/tiprpt/countries/2017/271295.htm.
[20 February 2018].
Human Rights Watch & Uzbek-German Forum for Human Rights 2017,'We Can’t Refuse to Pick Cotton' Forced and Child Labor Linked to WorldBank Group Investments in Uzbekistan. Available from: https://www.
hrw.org/sites/default/files/report_pdf/uzbekistan0617_web_3.pdf. [23October 2017]. Human Rights Watch 2013, Uzbekistan: Forced Labor
Widespread in Cotton Harvest. Available from: https://www.hrw.org/
news/2013/01/25/uzbekistan-forced-labor-widespread-cotton-harvest.
[9 February 2018].
International Labour Organization 2018, Third-party monitoring of
measures against child labour and forced labour during the 2017 cotton
harvest in Uzbekistan. Available from: http://www.ilo.org/wcmsp5/groups/
public/---ed_norm/---ipec/documents/publication/wcms_617830.pdf.
[20 February 2018].
Campos, A 2017, 'Suppliers of Lowe’s in the US and Walmart in Brazil
linked to slave labor in the Amazon,' Repórter Brasil, 15 March. Available
from: http://reporterbrasil.org.br/2017/03/suppliers-of-lowes-in-the-usand-walmart-in-brazil-linked-to-slave-labor-in-the-amazon/. [19 January2018].
Verité 2014, Forced Labor in the Production of Electronic Goods in
Malaysia: A Comprehensive Study of Scope and Characteristics.
Available from: https://verite.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/11/
VeriteForcedLaborMalaysianElectronics2014.pdf. [19 January 2017].
Verité 2012, The Electronics Sector in Malaysia: A Case Study in MigrantWorkers’ Risk of Forced Labor. Available from: http://www.verite.org/
wp-content/uploads/2016/11/ElectronicsMalaysia_MigrantWorkers_
WhitePaperFINAL3.pdf. [19 December 2017].

27

28

47

The law previously had what was known informally as the ‘consumptive
demand loophole.’ In order to meet US market demand for certain goods,
this loophole permitted imports to continue even if there was evidence offorced labour in the supply chain for that product. However, this loophole
was closed when former President Obama signed into law H.R. 644 –Trade Facilitation and Trade Enforcement Act of 2015.
U.S. Customs and Border Protection 2016, Forced Labor. Available from:https://www.cbp.gov/trade/trade-community/programs-outreach/convictimportations. [19 January 2018].

29

As above.

30'UN warns tough North Korea sanctions risk hurting millions in needof aid,' The Guardian, 11 December 2017. Available from: https://www.
theguardian.com/world/2017/dec/11/north-korea-sanctions-human-rightstoll-united-nations. [6 February 2018].

31

32

33

34

35

36

37

38

39

40

41

42

43

44

UN Security Council 2017, Security Council Tightens Sanctions on
Democratic People’s Republic of Korea, Unanimously Adopting
Resolution 2397 (2017), United Nations, 22 December. Available from:https://www.un.org/press/en/2017/sc13141.doc.htm. [6 February 2017].
U.S. Department of the Treasury 2017, Treasury Sanctions Additional
North Korean Officials and Entities in Response to the Regime’s
Serious Human Rights Abuses and Censorship Activities, United States
Government, 26 October. Available from: https://www.treasury.gov/presscenter/press-releases/Pages/sm0191.aspx. [6 February 2018].
Cashen, E 2017, 'The impact of economic sanctions,' World Finance, 20
April. Available from: https://www.worldfinance.com/special-reports/theimpact-of-economic-sanctions. [24 January 2018].
'UN warns tough North Korea sanctions risk hurting millions in needof aid,' The Guardian, 11 December 2017. Available from: https://www.
theguardian.com/world/2017/dec/11/north-korea-sanctions-human-rightstoll-united-nations. [6 February 2018].
OECD 2017, Government at a Glance 2017, OECD Publishing. Available
from: http://dx.doi.org/10.1787/gov_glance-2017-en. [12 December 2017].
European Commission 2018, Public Procurement. Available from: https://
ec.europa.eu/growth/single-market/public-procurement_en.
[24 January 2018].
USA Spending 2017, Overview of Awards by FY 2008-2018.
Available from: https://www.usaspending.gov/Pages/TextView.
aspx?data=OverviewOfAwardsByFiscalYearTextView. [13 December 2017].
US Government Publishing Office 2012, Executive Order 13627 of
September 25, 2012: Strengthening Protections Against Trafficking in
Persons in Federal Contracts. Available from: https://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/
pkg/FR-2012-10-02/pdf/2012-24374.pdf. [13 December 2017].
Fragale, R 2017, 'Slavery in Brazil: Bringing back the 'dirty list',' Slave Free
Trade, 21 September. Available from: https://slavefreetrade.org/brazilslavery-dirty-list/. [30 January 2017].
European Commission 2016, Green and Sustainable Public Procurement,
European Union. Available from: http://ec.europa.eu/environment/gpp/
versus_en.htm. [15 December 2017].
European Union 2014, Directive 2014/24/EU of the European Parliamentand of the Council of 26 February 2014 on public procurement andrepealing Directive 2004/18/EC, EUR-Lex. Available from: http://eur-lex.
europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=celex:32014L0024.
[14 December 2017].
Hansom, D 2016, 'Mandatory exclusions: a new tool to protect humanrights in EU public procurement?' International Learning Lab on Public
Procurement and Human Rights, 28 November. Available from: https://www.hrprocurementlab.org/blog/mandatory-exclusions-a-new-tool-toprotect-human-rights-in-eu-public-procurement/. [14 December 2017].
European Commission 2016, Supporting social responsibility in theeconomy through public procurement, European Union. Available from:http://ec.europa.eu/growth/content/supporting-social-responsibilityeconomy-through-public-procurement-0_en. [15 December 2017].
For more information, please see: Dentons 2016, A few questions about
Implementation of the EU public procurement directives. Available
from: https://www.dentons.com/-/media/pdfs/insights/2016/june/
implementation-of-the-eu-public-procurement-directives.pdf.
[15 December 2017].

48

45

Walk Free Foundation

Joint Committee on Human Rights 2017, Human Rights and Business2017: promoting responsibility and ensuring accountability - Sixth
Report of Session 2016-17, House of Lords and House of Commons.
Available from: https://publications.parliament.uk/pa/jt201617/jtselect/jtrights/443/443.pdf. [8 November 2017].

62

63
46

Crockett, A, Elgie, O & Wootton, J 2017. Potential amendments to the UK
Modern Slavery Act. Herbert Smith Freehills. Available from: https://www.
herbertsmithfreehills.com/latest-thinking/potential-amendments-to-theuk-modern-slavery-act. [5 February 2018].
64

47

German Federal Foreign Office 2016. National Action Plan:
Implementation of the UN Guiding Principles on Business andHuman Rights 2016-2020. German Government. Available from:https://www.auswaertiges-amt.de/cae/servlet/contentblob/754770/
publicationFile/230425/161221-NAP-DL.pdf. [27 November 2017].
65

48

As above.

49

Federal Ministry of Economic and International Development n.d.,
How can I integrate sustainability into the procurement process?,
Sustainability Compass. Available from: http://oeffentlichebeschaffung.
kompass-nachhaltigkeit.de/en/sustainability-in-the-procurementprocess/. [27 November 2017].

50

51

52

Gillard, J 2013, Further Government Action To Eliminate Modern Slavery,
Department of the Prime Minister and Cabinet, Australian Government.
Available from: https://pmtranscripts.pmc.gov.au/release/transcript-19141.
[6 October 2017].

55

56

57

58

59

60

61

Joint Standing Committee on Foreign Affairs, Defence and Trade 2017,
Hidden in Plain Sight: An inquiry into establishing a Modern Slavery Act
in Australia, Commonwealth of Australia. Available from: http://parlinfo.
aph.gov.au/parlInfo/download/committees/reportjnt/024102/toc_pdf/
HiddeninPlainSight.pdf;fileType=application%2Fpdf. [14 December 2017].

69

Joint Standing Committee on Foreign Affairs, Defence and Trade 2017,
Hidden in Plain Sight: An inquiry into establishing a Modern Slavery Act
in Australia, Commonwealth of Australia. Available from: http://parlinfo.
aph.gov.au/parlInfo/download/committees/reportjnt/024102/toc_pdf/
HiddeninPlainSight.pdf;fileType=application%2Fpdf. [14 December 2017].
Home Office 2017, Transparency in Supply Chains etc.: A practical guide,
Government of the United Kingdom. Available from: https://www.gov.
uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/649906/
Transparency_in_Supply_Chains_A_Practical_Guide_2017.pdf.
[8 November 2017].

70

71

72

Exchange rate as at 20 February 2018: US$1 = £0.72.
Joint Committee on Human Rights 2017, Human Rights and Business2017: promoting responsibility and ensuring accountability - Sixth
Report of Session 2016-17, House of Lords and House of Commons.
Available from: https://publications.parliament.uk/pa/jt201617/jtselect/jtrights/443/443.pdf. [8 November 2017].
Becerra, X, The California Transparency in Supply Chains Act. Stateof California Department of Justice. Available from: https://oag.ca.gov/
SB657 [17 December 2017]. Harris, K D 2015, The California Transparency
in Supply Chains Act: A Resource Guide, California Department of Justice.
Available from: https://oag.ca.gov/sites/all/files/agweb/pdfs/sb657/
resource-guide.pdf. [5 February 2017].
Respaut, R 2016, 'California surpasses France as world's sixth-largest
economy,' Reuters, 18 June. Available from: https://www.reuters.com/
article/us-california-economy/california-surpasses-france-as-worlds-sixthlargest-economy-idUSKCN0Z32K2. [17 December 2017].

73

Australian Lawyers for Human Rights 2018, ALHR welcomes Government
commitment to introduce a Modern Slavery Bill by mid-2018, February 16.
Available from: https://alhr.org.au/alhr-welcomes-modern-slavery-bill-bymid-201/. [20 February 2018].
International Labour Organization n.d., What Is the Pact for theEradication of Slave Labour? Available from: http://www.ilo.org/
wcmsp5/groups/public/---dgreports/---ilo-washington/documents/
genericdocument/wcms_189835.pdf. [7 November 2017].
Kelly, A 2012, 'Brazil’s ‘dirty list’ names and shames companies involved
in slave labour,' The Guardian, 25 July. Available from: https://www.
theguardian.com/sustainable-business/brazil-dirty-list-names-shamesslave-labour. [12 November 2017].
Appelbaum, R and Lichtenstein, N 2016, Achieving Workers’ Rights in the
Global Economy, Cornell University Press, New York.
Rogoz, M 2016, Responses to Demand in the Context of Trafficking in
Human Beings: Regulatory measures from twelve national contexts.
Available from: http://www.demandat.eu/publications/madalina-rogoz-etal-responses-demand-context-trafficking-human-beings-regulatory.
[24 January 2017].
Fragale, R 2017, 'Slavery in Brazil: Bringing back the 'dirty list',' Slave Free
Trade, 21 September. Available from: https://slavefreetrade.org/brazilslavery-dirty-list/. [30 January 2017].

74

Douglas, B 2016, 'Brazil: loss of ‘dirty list’ sparks fears of worker
exploitation as Olympics near,' The Guardian, 2 March. Available from:https://www.theguardian.com/global-development/2016/mar/02/
brazil-loss-dirty-list-sparks-fears-worker-exploitation-olympic-gamesinternational-labour-organisation. [15 November 2017].

75

Kaye, L 2017, 'Brazil’s Political Turmoil Endangers 20 years of Progresson Forced Labor,' Triple Pundit, 11 January. Available from: https://www.
triplepundit.com/special/cotton-sustainability-c-and-a-foundation/brazilpolitical-turmoil-forced-labor/. [13 November 2017].

76

Becerra, X, The California Transparency in Supply Chains Act, Stateof California Department of Justice. Available from: https://oag.ca.gov/
SB657. [17 December 2017].
Aseemblée Nationale, Entreprises : devoir de vigilance des entreprises
donneuses d'ordre. Available from: http://www.assemblee-nationale.fr/14/
dossiers/devoir_vigilance_entreprises_donneuses_ordre.asp.
[17 December 2017].

The Hon Michael Keenan MP 2017, Proposed new laws to help end
modern slavery. Available from: https://www.ministerjustice.gov.au/
Media/Pages/Proposed-new-laws-to-help-end-modern-slavery-16August-2017.aspx. [9 October 2017].

67

Department of Finance 2017, Commonwealth Procurement Rules:
Achieving value for money, Australian Government. Available from: http://
www.finance.gov.au/sites/default/files/commonwealth-procurementrules.pdf. [6 October 2017].

54

Joint Standing Committee on Foreign Affairs, Defence and Trade 2017,
Terms of Reference, Parliament of Australia. Available from: http://www.
aph.gov.au/Parliamentary_Business/Committees/Joint/Foreign_Affairs_
Defence_and_Trade/ModernSlavery/Terms_of_Reference.
[9 October 2017].

Orphanage tourism is where tourists visit and volunteer in orphanages.
While tourists may be unaware, there are reports that these ‘orphanages’
are a money-making exercise, and that often the orphans still have living
parents. There are examples where the children are exploited, including
physical and sexual abuse.

68

As above, p. 25.

European Coalition of Corporate Justice 2017, French Corporate Duty Of
Vigilance Law, 23 February. Available from: https://business-humanrights.
org/sites/default/files/documents/French%20Corporate%20Duty%20
of%20Vigilance%20Law%20FAQ.pdf. [17 December 2017].

66

Walk Free Foundation 2017, Walk Free Submission to the Joint Committeeon Law Enforcement: Inquiry into Human Trafficking. Available from:http://www.aph.gov.au/Parliamentary_Business/Committees/Joint/Law_
Enforcement/Human_trafficking/Submissions. [5 October 2017].

53

Fasterling, B 2017, 'Vigilance or Compliance? On the New French‘Vigilance’ Law’,' New York University Stern Centre for Business andHuman Rights Blog, 19 June. Available from: https://bhr.stern.nyu.edu/
blogs/french-vigiliance-law. [28 November 2017].

77

Labour Exploitation Accountability Hub 2017, One step forward and two
steps back? Brazil’s journey to combat labour exploitation. Available
from: http://accountabilityhub.org/blogs/one-step-forward-and-two-stepsback-brazils-journey-to-combat-labour-exploitation/. [8 November 2017].
European Union 2016, Directive 2014/95/EU of the European Parliamentand of the Council of 22 October 2014 amending Directive 2013/34/EU as
regards disclosure of non-financial and diversity information by certain
large undertakings and groups, EUR-lex. Available from: http://eur-lex.
europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=CELEX%3A32014L0095.
[17 December 2017].

THE G20 OBLIGATION

78

79

80

81

82

83

84

This includes EU listed companies and unlisted companies such as
banks, insurance companies, or other “public-interest entities” asnominated by member countries.
European Commission n.d., Non-financial reporting, European Union.
Available from: https://ec.europa.eu/info/business-economy-euro/
company-reporting-and-auditing/company-reporting/non-financialreporting_en. [17 December 2017].

97

As above.
Altschuller, S A & Lehr, A K 2017, Proposed Dutch Legislation on Child
Labor Due Diligence: What You Need to Know, Corporate Social
Responsibility and the Law, 24 August. Available from: http://www.
csrandthelaw.com/2017/08/24/proposed-dutch-legislation-on-childlabor-due-diligence-what-you-need-to-know/. [17 December 2017].

Field source.

99

Exchange rate as at 6 February 2018: US$1 = 64.10 Indian Rupee.

100

See for example: Danvi’s case, written up in Global Alliance Against
Traffic in Women (GAATW) 2017, Enabling Access to Justice, GAATW,
p 28. Available from: http://www.gaatw.org/publications/GAATW_
Enabling%20Access%20to%20Justice_2017.pdf. [4 October 2017].

102

Rejimon, K 2017, ‘Migrant maids in Oman at risk as India scraps
rescue scheme,’ Thomson Reuters Foundation News, 19 September.
Available from: https://news.trust.org/item/20170919162450-9wi2k [5October 2017]. ‘India launched online registration system for foreign
employers,’ The Economic Times, 02 July 2015. Available from: http://
economictimes.indiatimes.com/jobs/india-launches-online-registrationsystem-for-foreign-employers/articleshow/47908192.cms?utm_
source=contentofinterest&utm_medium=text&utm_campaign=cppst.
[13 October 2017].

103

104
85

86

87

88

89

90

Ewins, J 2015, Independent Review of the Overseas Domestic Workers
Visa. Available from: https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/
uploads/attachment_data/file/486532/ODWV_Review_-_Final_
Report__6_11_15_.pdf. [17 November 2017].
The “zero draft” of the Global Compact for Migration (released in
February 2018) also emphasises the need for ethical recruitment as partof the broader goal of at achieving safe, orderly, and regular migration.
This negotiating draft includes a set of 22 objectives, including “fair andethical recruitment and safeguard conditions that ensure decent work.”
The “zero draft” can be accessed here: http://refugeesmigrants.un.org/
sites/default/files/180205_gcm_zero_draft_final.pdf.

105

106

This indicator of government responses does not differentiate between
national and migrant workers.

107

Government of the United Kingdom 2017, Employment Agencies Act
1973, The National Archives. Available from: http://www.legislation.gov.
uk/ukpga/1973/35/section/6. [16 November 2017].

108

The licensing scheme was introduced by the Gangmasters (Licensing)Act 2004, which can be accessed at: http://www.legislation.gov.uk/
ukpga/2004/11/contents.

109

Gangmasters & Labour Abuse Authority 2017, What we do. Available from:http://www.gla.gov.uk/who-we-are/what-we-do/. [16 November 2017].
110

91

Gangmasters & Labour Abuse Authority 2017, Issue 53: GLAA Powers
under the Police and Criminal Evidence Act (PACE) 1984. Available from:http://www.gla.gov.uk/media/3120/gla-powers-under-pace.pdf.
[24 January 2017].
111

92

Metcalf, D 2017, United Kingdom Labour Market Enforcement Strategy- Introductory Report, Government of the United Kingdom, p. 8-9.
Available from: https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/
attachment_data/file/629872/labour-market-enforcement-strategyintroductory-report.pdf. [16 November 2017].

93

Exchange rate as at 6 February 2018: US$1 = €0.81.

94

As above.

95

96

Federal Ministry of Justice and Consumer Protection, Sozialgesetzbuch(SGB) Drittes Buch (III) - Arbeitsförderung: § 296 Vermittlungsvertragzwischen Vermittlern und Arbeitsuchenden. Available from: https://www.
gesetze-im-internet.de/sgb_3/__296.html. [2 February 2018].
Field Source.

United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime 2015, The Role of Recruitment
Fees and Abusive and Fraudulent Recruitment Practices of Recruitment
Agencies in Trafficking in Persons. Available from: https://www.unodc.
org/documents/human-trafficking/2015/Recruitment_Fees_ReportFinal-22_June_2015_AG_Final.pdf. [27 October 2018].

101

Elgie, O 2017, Swiss Parliament calls for parent company liability forhuman rights breaches, Herbert Smith Freehills, 17 November. Available
from: https://www.herbertsmithfreehills.com/latest-thinking/swissparliament-calls-for-parent-company-liability-for-human-rights-breaches.
[17 November].
Global Affairs Canada 2018, The Government of Canada brings leadershipto responsible business conduct abroad, Government of Canada, 17 January.
Available from: https://www.canada.ca/en/global-affairs/news/2018/01/
the_government_ofcanadabringsleadershiptoresponsiblebusinesscond.
html. [29 January 2017].

Employment Security Act (No. 82, 2003), p. 20, art. 32-3. Available from:http://www.ilo.org/dyn/natlex/natlex4.detail?p_lang=en&p_isn=27781.
[27 October 2017].

98

GRI, CSR Europe & Accountancy Europe 2017, Member State
Implementation of Directive 2014/95/EU. Available from: https://www.
csreurope.org/sites/default/files/uploads/CSR%20Europe_GRI%20
NFR%20publication_0.pdf. [17 December 2017].

49

112

Ministry of External Affairs, E-Migrate Project, Government of India.
Available from: https://emigrate.gov.in/ext/static/EmigrateBrochureEng.pdf.
[10 March 2018].
Global Alliance Against Traffic in Women 2017, Enabling Access toJustice, p.28. Available from: http://www.gaatw.org/publications/GAATW_
Enabling%20Access%20to%20Justice_2017.pdf. [17 December 2017].
Fair Work Ombudsman 2017, On-hire employee services - workplace
obligations, Australian Government. Available from: https://www.fairwork.
gov.au/ArticleDocuments/723/On-hire-employees-services-workplaceobligations.pdf.aspx. [9 October 2017].
Renshaw, L 2016, Migrating for work and study: The role of the migration
broker in facilitating workplace exploitation, human trafficking andslavery, Australian Institue of Criminology, p.12. Available from: http://
www.aic.gov.au/media_library/publications/tandi_pdf/tandi527.pdf.
[9 November 2017].
David, F 2010, Labour Trafficking, Research and Public Policy Series,
Canberra: Australian Institute of Criminology.
Park, A, Wu, Y W & Du, Y 2012. Informal Employment in Urban China:
Measurement and Implications. World Bank. Available from: http://
documents.worldbank.org/curated/en/383331468220789675/
pdf/777370WP0Infor00Box377299B00PUBLIC0.pdf. [22 September 2017].
Lee, C K 2016, 'Precarization or Empowerment: Reflections on Recent
Labor Unrest in China,' The Journal of Asian Studies, vol. 75, no. 2, pp.
317-333.
As above. Park, A, Wu, Y W & Du, Y 2012, Informal Employment in Urban
China: Measurement and Implications, World Bank. Available from:http://documents.worldbank.org/curated/en/383331468220789675/
pdf/777370WP0Infor00Box377299B00PUBLIC0.pdf. [22 September 2017].
Lee, C K 2016, ‘Precarization or Empowerment: Reflections on Recent
Labor Unrest in China,’ The Journal of Asian Studies, vol. 75, no. 2, pp.
317-333.
China Briefing 2013, China Revises Labor Contract Law, 18 March.
Available from: http://www.china-briefing.com/news/2013/03/18/chinarevises-labor-contract-law.html. [11 July 2017].

50

Walk Free Foundation

WALKFREEFOUNDATION.ORG