U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE

WASHINGTON : 

For sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Printing Office

Internet: bookstore.gpo.gov Phone: toll free (866) 512–1800; DC area (202) 512–1800

Fax: (202) 512–2104 Mail: Stop IDCC, Washington, DC 20402–0001

81–758 PDF 2013

THE UNINTENDED CONSEQUENCES 

OF DODD-FRANK’S CONFLICT 

MINERALS PROVISION 

HEARING 

BEFORE THE

SUBCOMMITTEE ON 

MONETARY POLICY AND TRADE 

OF THE

COMMITTEE ON FINANCIAL SERVICES 

U.S. HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

ONE HUNDRED THIRTEENTH CONGRESS 

FIRST SESSION 

MAY 21, 2013 

Printed for the use of the Committee on Financial Services 

Serial No. 113–23 

( 

(II) 

HOUSE COMMITTEE ON FINANCIAL SERVICES 

JEB HENSARLING, Texas, Chairman 

GARY G. MILLER, California, Vice Chairman 

SPENCER BACHUS, Alabama, Chairman 

Emeritus 

PETER T. KING, New York 

EDWARD R. ROYCE, California 

FRANK D. LUCAS, Oklahoma 

SHELLEY MOORE CAPITO, West Virginia 

SCOTT GARRETT, New Jersey 

RANDY NEUGEBAUER, Texas 

PATRICK T. MCHENRY, North Carolina 

JOHN CAMPBELL, California 

MICHELE BACHMANN, Minnesota 

KEVIN McCARTHY, California 

STEVAN PEARCE, New Mexico 

BILL POSEY, Florida 

MICHAEL G. FITZPATRICK, Pennsylvania 

LYNN A. WESTMORELAND, Georgia 

BLAINE LUETKEMEYER, Missouri 

BILL HUIZENGA, Michigan 

SEAN P. DUFFY, Wisconsin 

ROBERT HURT, Virginia 

MICHAEL G. GRIMM, New York 

STEVE STIVERS, Ohio 

STEPHEN LEE FINCHER, Tennessee 

MARLIN A. STUTZMAN, Indiana 

MICK MULVANEY, South Carolina 

RANDY HULTGREN, Illinois 

DENNIS A. ROSS, Florida 

ROBERT PITTENGER, North Carolina 

ANN WAGNER, Missouri 

ANDY BARR, Kentucky 

TOM COTTON, Arkansas 

KEITH J. ROTHFUS, Pennsylvania 

MAXINE WATERS, California, Ranking 

Member 

CAROLYN B. MALONEY, New York 

NYDIA M. VELA ́ ZQUEZ, New York 

MELVIN L. WATT, North Carolina 

BRAD SHERMAN, California 

GREGORY W. MEEKS, New York 

MICHAEL E. CAPUANO, Massachusetts 

RUBE ́ N HINOJOSA, Texas 

WM. LACY CLAY, Missouri 

CAROLYN MCCARTHY, New York 

STEPHEN F. LYNCH, Massachusetts 

DAVID SCOTT, Georgia 

AL GREEN, Texas 

EMANUEL CLEAVER, Missouri 

GWEN MOORE, Wisconsin 

KEITH ELLISON, Minnesota 

ED PERLMUTTER, Colorado 

JAMES A. HIMES, Connecticut 

GARY C. PETERS, Michigan 

JOHN C. CARNEY, JR., Delaware 

TERRI A. SEWELL, Alabama 

BILL FOSTER, Illinois 

DANIEL T. KILDEE, Michigan 

PATRICK MURPHY, Florida 

JOHN K. DELANEY, Maryland 

KYRSTEN SINEMA, Arizona 

JOYCE BEATTY, Ohio 

DENNY HECK, Washington 

SHANNON MCGAHN, Staff Director 

JAMES H. CLINGER, Chief Counsel 

(III) 

SUBCOMMITTEE ON MONETARY POLICY AND TRADE

JOHN CAMPBELL, California, Chairman 

BILL HUIZENGA, Michigan, Vice Chairman 

FRANK D. LUCAS, Oklahoma 

STEVAN PEARCE, New Mexico 

BILL POSEY, Florida 

MICHAEL G. GRIMM, New York 

STEPHEN LEE FINCHER, Tennessee 

MARLIN A. STUTZMAN, Indiana 

MICK MULVANEY, South Carolina 

ROBERT PITTENGER, North Carolina 

TOM COTTON, Arkansas 

WM. LACY CLAY, Missouri, Ranking 

Member 

GWEN MOORE, Wisconsin 

GARY C. PETERS, Michigan 

ED PERLMUTTER, Colorado 

BILL FOSTER, Illinois 

JOHN C. CARNEY, JR., Delaware 

TERRI A. SEWELL, Alabama 

DANIEL T. KILDEE, Michigan 

PATRICK MURPHY, Florida 

(V) 

C O N T E N T S 

Page 

Hearing held on: 

May 21, 2013 ..................................................................................................... 1 

Appendix: 

May 21, 2013 ..................................................................................................... 35 

WITNESSES 

TUESDAY, MAY 21, 2013 

Aronson, David, freelance writer, editor of www.congoresources.org .................. 5 

Dizolele, Mvemba Phezo, Visiting Fellow, Hoover Institution on War, Revolution and Peace ...................................................................................................... 7 

Goss, Rick, Senior Vice President of Environment and Sustainability, Information Technology Industry Council (ITI) ......................................................... 10 

Pickles, Sophia, Policy Advisor, Global Witness ................................................... 12 

APPENDIX 

Prepared statements: 

McDermott, Hon. Jim ....................................................................................... 36 

Moore, Hon. Gwen ............................................................................................ 38 

Aronson, David ................................................................................................. 40 

Dizolele, Mvemba Phezo .................................................................................. 49 

Goss, Rick .......................................................................................................... 54 

Pickles, Sophia .................................................................................................. 60 

ADDITIONAL MATERIAL SUBMITTED FOR THE RECORD

Campbell, Hon. John: 

Written statement of The Institute of Internal Auditors (IIA) ..................... 64 

Clay, Hon. Wm. Lacy: 

Written statement of the Atma Foundation ................................................... 67 

Written statement of Bishop Nicolas Djomo, Bishop of the Diocese of 

Tshumbe in the Democratic Republic of the Congo, and President of 

the Catholic Bishops’ Conference of the Congo .......................................... 69 

Written statement of the Responsible Sourcing Network ............................. 75 

(1) 

THE UNINTENDED CONSEQUENCES 

OF DODD-FRANK’S CONFLICT 

MINERALS PROVISION 

Tuesday, May 21, 2013 

U.S. HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES, 

SUBCOMMITTEE ON MONETARY

POLICY AND TRADE, 

COMMITTEE ON FINANCIAL SERVICES, 

Washington, D.C. 

The subcommittee met, pursuant to notice, at 2:01 p.m., in room 

2128, Rayburn House Office Building, Hon. John Campbell [chairman of the subcommittee] presiding. 

Members present: Representatives Campbell, Huizenga, Pearce, 

Posey, Grimm, Stutzman, Mulvaney, Pittenger, Cotton; Clay, 

Moore, and Peters. 

Chairman CAMPBELL. The subcommittee will come to order. 

Without objection, the Chair is authorized to declare a recess of the 

committee at any time, and I will note that we are expecting votes 

on the Floor sometime prior to 2:30. So I expect that we will be 

recessing when those votes come. And the vote series should last 

about 45 or 50 minutes. So we will take a recess, and then we will 

come back and continue and conclude the hearing after that time. 

I also want to remind our audience that disruptions of committee 

business constitute a violation of the District of Columbia code. 

And I want to thank you in advance for your cooperation in facilitating an orderly and respectful hearing this afternoon. 

The Chair now recognizes himself for 3 minutes for an opening 

statement. 

Thank you to our distinguished panel for appearing today before 

this subcommittee. The Democratic Republic of the Congo, or the 

DRC, has been in a near-constant state of civil war since it obtained independence in 1960. Some experts have argued that the 

Congolese army and various armed militias are fighting for control 

over mineral-rich areas in eastern DRC and that the sale of minerals in this region finances weapons purchases. 

By extension of this logic, cutting off the mineral trade from the 

conflict areas of the DRC would starve the militias of their funding, 

and therefore end a long and brutal civil war. 

That narrative was inserted into the Dodd-Frank Act as Section 

1502, which requires public companies to certify to the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission that their supply chains are free of 

any and all tin, tantalum, tungsten, and gold originating from the 

2 

eastern DRC. The SEC issued its final rule implementing Section 

1502 just last year. 

The reason for this hearing is to evaluate the consequences of 

Section 1502 as implemented. Congress has an obligation to conduct regular oversight on the laws it passes and the agencies that 

implement them. It is important that we regularly assess laws 

such as Section 1502 in order to see if they are working as they 

were intended. 

There is another narrative that I believe we will hear today from 

some of our witnesses. Many Congolese activists remain concerned 

that Section 1502 has had a significant adverse effect on innocent 

bystanders in the DRC and that the result has been a de facto embargo on all minerals originating from the DRC and from surrounding areas. 

As much as 17 percent of Congolese rely on the mineral trade, 

with a majority of the revenues accruing to artisanal miners unaffiliated with the conflict. Many of these people have seen their livelihoods eliminated as the market for legitimately mined minerals 

has evaporated. The consequences have been so impactful that the 

Congolese now refer to Section 1502 as ‘‘Loi Obama’’ or ‘‘Obama’s 

law.’’ 

Despite the economic consequences, there is no indication that 

the violence is subsiding. Just yesterday, the Associated Press reported that M23, a rebel group being funded by Rwanda, opened 

fire on Congolese military forces north of Goma. M23 soldiers are 

from the Tutsi ethnic group, who are upset that the United Nations 

intervention brigade has been sent into the DRC with authority to 

engage the rebel groups. That narrative is premised upon claims 

that minerals will cause this conflict. 

So what we are evaluating today is, to put it simply, if this law 

was intended to improve the lives of millions of Congolese, has it 

had that effect? If it hasn’t, what should Congress or the Administration be doing differently? 

I yield back the balance of my time. I would like to recognize the 

ranking member of the subcommittee, the gentleman from Missouri, Mr. Clay, for 3 minutes for his opening statement. 

Mr. CLAY. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. And thank you for conducting this hearing. 

Today, the subcommittee will hold a hearing on the unintended 

consequences of Dodd-Frank’s mineral provision. This hearing focuses on the Democratic Republic of the Congo’s activities in the 

mineral trade industry. 

The Republic of the Congo is home to vast reserves of gold, tin, 

and other minerals critical to the production of many items such 

as iPads, cell phones and others. Also, the Congo has a long-running civil conflict between the national government and a cast of 

warlords and local gangs. This conflict is due to which group controls the land and has the minerals. 

The minerals help fund the conflict, as the warlords force locals 

into the mines either at gunpoint, or through rape and murder 

campaigns. The warlords then sell the minerals on the black market, giving them the money they need to buy weapons and to subjugate locals and fight against the national army. 

3 

To address this issue, former U.S. Senators Sam Brownback and 

Russ Feingold, as well as current U.S. Senator Dick Durbin, introduced a bill requiring companies to disclose their sourcing efforts. 

The bill was adopted into Dodd-Frank by unanimous consent, and 

a companion to the minerals measure won by partisan support in 

the House and Senate, and President Obama signed the DoddFrank Act into law in July of 2010. 

So, Mr. Chairman, I look forward to the witnesses’ testimony. 

And before I yield back, I would like to ask unanimous consent to 

submit 3 letters from different groups on their positions on this aspect of Dodd-Frank. 

Chairman CAMPBELL. Without objection, it is so ordered. 

Mr. CLAY. And I yield back, Mr. Chairman. 

Chairman CAMPBELL. The gentleman yields back his time. 

Now, for the purpose of an opening statement, I would like to 

recognize the vice chairman of the subcommittee, the gentleman 

from Michigan, Mr. Huizenga, for 4 minutes. 

Mr. HUIZENGA. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I appreciate your efforts here today, as well as those of Ranking Member Clay. 

I know this often gets said, but this truly is an important hearing. And I wish there was more attention paid to this particular 

issue because it is so important not only for the western world, but 

probably, frankly, more important for the African world and what 

this means in the long run as we are trying to make policy in this 

world economy. 

My Spanish is better than my French, but Mr. Aronson, you had 

put a traditional Congolese saying on there, and my pronunciation 

of the French will sound like Spanish. So I am just going to stick 

with the English translation, but, ‘‘For us, without us, it is against 

us.’’ And that is exactly what I am trying to capture, I guess, as 

we are looking into these issues. 

We are here today to discuss Section 1502 as it applies to these 

minerals sourced in these conflict regions, such as the Congo. And 

I have asked for a map of the DRC to be put up as well, because 

I know so often, we kind of get lost as to where this is and what 

the implications are. And frankly, how huge the country is, and 

how far away Kinshasa would be from some of these other areas. 

I would ask our witnesses, as you are going through this, to 

please point out where on the map you see the problems and the 

solutions coming from so that we may all have a better, fuller picture of what is going on. 

But I think we can all agree on protecting the citizens of the 

Congo and condemning all human rights violations. That is something we can agree on, regardless of party affiliation or where we 

are from. But my concern is that this overly burdensome regulation 

has really done nothing to improve the lives of those in the mining 

community, but has only led to more violence in the region. 

In fact, these efforts to ensure that the minerals do not enter the 

supply chains have resulted in a de facto embargo against the 

DRC. And according to the extractive industry’s transparency initiative, as many as 12.5 million Congolese, approximately 17 percent of the DRC’s population, depend on mineral trading to make 

a living. And most of the money generated by mineral trading goes 

to artisanal miners, rather than soldiers and rebels. 

4 

Dr. Laura Seay, assistant professor of political science at Morehouse College, who testified before this committee last year, reported that, ‘‘Despite ending most of the trade in Congolese conflict 

minerals,’’ the de facto embargo has ‘‘done little to improve the security situation or the daily lives of most Congolese.’’ So I am looking forward to investigating that. 

And for any policymaker, I think this is probably going to ring 

true. It becomes disheartening if we really realize that well-intentioned but misguided policy doesn’t have the impact for which it is 

intended. And we have to remember that this was never once, Mr. 

Chairman, debated in Congress. It was certainly not—I wasn’t here 

for the creation of Dodd-Frank, but I am here for the echo effects 

of it. We know that this was one of those provisions that was slid 

in, in the conference committee. And this unprecedented use of securities regulation as an instrument of human rights policy fails to 

help end the civil war in the DRC, and instead only exacerbates 

the problem that it was intended to combat. 

I look forward to hearing from our witnesses today on ways to 

protect the citizens in these conflict regions. That is very important 

to me. And Mr. Chairman and Mr. Clay, I again appreciate you 

holding this hearing today. Thank you. 

Chairman CAMPBELL. The gentleman yields back his time. 

And now, we will recognize for his opening statement the gentleman from Indiana, Mr. Stutzman, for 11⁄2 minutes. 

Mr. STUTZMAN. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and thank you for 

calling this hearing today. 

As others have already said, we all share the goal of bringing 

peace and stability to the Congo. We are fortunate to live in a 

country where the rule of law is observed. Our police and military 

do not act with impunity, and entrepreneurs, such as those in my 

home State of Indiana, are able to build businesses and contribute 

to this country’s prosperity. 

The Congo is rich in resources, and the prosperity we enjoy in 

this country is possible in the Congo. Unfortunately, however, the 

entrepreneurial spirit of many Congolese has been crushed by instability, feuding over land ownership, corruption, and a lack of 

clear governing authority in large parts of the country, among 

other problems. 

The good intentions of those who push for the inclusion of Section 1502 of the Dodd-Frank Act are easy to understand. They see 

minerals in the Congo as the source of the violence, and are, therefore, trying to cut off profits to war lords. 

I look forward to hearing from our witnesses as to how well 

Dodd-Frank is achieving that objective of denying funding to violent groups. Based upon the written testimony from our witnesses, 

I am concerned it is not working. The question I have, then, is 

whether using the American security’s disclosure process is the 

right way to reduce violence in the Congo. Like many of my colleagues, I have significant reservations about this. What competence does the SEC have with the complex supply chain management in the mineral trade in the Congo? 

I also have a difficult time understanding how imposing a massive paperwork burden on U.S. companies, such as manufacturers 

5 

in my district, is likely to help reduce violence in the Congo. I look 

forward to hearing an update from these witnesses. 

And I yield back the balance of my time. 

Chairman CAMPBELL. The gentleman yields back. 

I believe the final opening statement will be the gentleman from 

North Carolina, Mr. Pittenger, who is recognized for 11⁄2 minutes. 

Mr. PITTENGER. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. The purpose of today’s hearing is to get at the truth of Section 1502 and to see how 

the conflict minerals policy is working on the ground today in the 

Democrat Republic of Congo. 

As we consider the conflict minerals policy, it is important to understand that the mission of the SEC is to protect investors, maintain fair and efficient markets, and facilitate capital formation. Section 1502 pushes the SEC into non-mandated and uncharted territory, changing it from an enforcer of the Nation’s securities laws 

into an international human rights cop in Central Africa. 

Is this the proper role of the SEC? Is Section 1502 the best policy 

prescription to end the violence in the DRC? Even though some 

have estimated that Section 1502 has cost as many as 2 million 

people their livelihoods, the violence in the eastern DRC persists, 

as armed militias continue to terrorize local populations. 

I don’t question the merits or the intentions of those who formed 

the policy, even in the quiet of the night, writing this in the DoddFrank bill in conference. But there seems to be a very strong indication that the impact has been counterproductive. 

Therefore, I look forward to hearing the witnesses and their testimony on the ongoing crisis in the DRC and how we can responsibly address this tragedy and yet remain focused on the SEC’s 

stated mission. 

Thank you. I yield back the balance of my time. 

Chairman CAMPBELL. The gentleman yields back. And that concludes the opening statements. 

We will now move to our distinguished panel of witnesses. And 

we will begin with Mr. David Aronson, who is editor of 

Congoresources.org. He is a freelance writer and editor who has 

lived in central Africa and written about the Congo for nearly 25 

years. He previously served as the senior editor for the U.S. Institute of Peace; served as a spokesman for the U.S. Commission on 

Civil Rights; was assistant director of the Southern Poverty Law 

Center; and served as the editor of the Carnegie Endowment for 

International Peace. He has a Bachelor’s degree in Anthropology 

from Wesleyan University and a Master’s of Fine Arts in English 

from the University of Florida. 

Mr. Aronson, you are recognized for 5 minutes. 

STATEMENT OF DAVID ARONSON, FREELANCE WRITER, 

EDITOR OF WWW.CONGORESOURCES.ORG 

Mr. ARONSON. Thank you, Chairman John Campbell, Ranking 

Member William Lacy Clay, Vice Chairman Bill Huizenga, and 

members of the subcommittee for holding this hearing on the unintended impacts of Dodd-Frank’s Conflict Minerals Provision. 

My name is David Aronson. I am a freelance writer and editor 

who has lived and worked on and off in central Africa for 25 years. 

6 

Dodd-Frank Section 1502, the conflict minerals provision of the 

2010 Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Act, is a case 

study in how good intentions can go awry, particularly when a compelling activist-sponsored narrative substitutes for considered and 

timely analysis. 

As I will make clear, the law imposed a de facto embargo on mineral production that impoverished the region’s million or so 

artisanal miners. It also drove the trade into the hands of militia 

and predatory Congolese army units. The military situation on the 

ground has considerably worsened since passage of the law, and 

the SEC’s promulgation of the implementation guidelines. 

Advocates for the law disregarded the consensus opinion of Congolese experts who repeatedly warned them of the dangers the 

campaign posed to their people. The case for Dodd-Frank Section 

1502 rested on some dubious and misleading assumptions, which 

I will be happy to discuss in the question-and-answer session. 

Finally, a dozen respected scholars and NGOs have independently studied this issue in the past 18 months. They have all concluded that the law is imposing unacceptable costs on the Congolese, while doing little to diminish the violence. 

First, a little background. In early 2011, in response to negative 

publicity from activist groups and in anticipation of the eventual 

implementation of Section 1502, the Electronic Industry Citizenship Coalition (EICC), stopped accepting minerals from central Africa that were not certifiably clean. The resulting de facto embargo 

of Congolese minerals went into effect on April 1, 2011 and had an 

immediate impact on the artisanal mine sector and on the broader 

economy of the region. 

To understand the extent of that impact, consider this open letter 

addressed to President Obama and SEC Chairman Mary Schapiro 

from 50 South Kivu civil society organizations, dated July 5th, 

2011: 

‘‘The abrupt cessation of the trade has had devastating impacts 

on our people. Millions of our artisanal miners have suddenly had 

their livelihood cut from under them. They find it increasingly difficult to pay school, health, or maternity fees. Some even report 

having difficulty providing food for their families. Mining enclaves 

have emerged over the past decade in places so remote that only 

planes can access them. The world’s sudden refusal to buy these 

minerals means that the planes no longer service these communities. With nothing to trade, they are unable to provide themselves with basic necessities. 

‘‘Because artisanal mining was one of our own engines of growth, 

secondary economic impacts are being felt throughout the province. 

Even in our large towns, economic activity has diminished. Construction has slowed, and trade in everything has fallen. People 

with very little to begin with are now doing with less.’’ 

I would add one more reason for concern. Near-epidemic levels 

of livestock and crop diseases are currently devastating agricultural production in the region. Families who dispersed their risk by 

sending some members out to mine, while keeping others at home 

to farm, are being hit on both counts. And they have nothing else 

to fall back on. 

7 

Today, the de facto embargo factor of Congo’s tantalum, tungsten, and tin, the ‘‘3 t’s,’’ is still in effect. And Section 1502 continues to depress the economy of eastern Congo. There has been 

some resumption in the trade overall; however, the trade has by no 

means reached its pre-embargo level, and miners receive significantly less than they used to for each kilo of mineral that they 

produce. 

In contrast, the gold trade continues unabated, with virtually no 

procedures in place to formalize, let alone control it. While a number of efforts are under way to establish conflict-free gold supply 

chains for boutique jewelers, gold is so valuable, so easy to smuggle, and so fungible, that it is hard to imagine how the trade could 

ever be brought under control. 

As I said, over the past 18 months, a dozen independent scholars 

and NGOs have published reports on the impact of the conflict 

minerals campaign. Strikingly, they have all reached similar conclusions. Section 1502 is harming ordinary people, helping entrench 

militia and war lords, and in no way significantly reducing conflict. 

To my knowledge, not a single independent analysis has concluded 

that Dodd-Frank Section 1502 has had a positive impact on development in eastern Congo. 

Finally, I would ask the subcommittee to listen to the voices of 

some Congolese who have been affected most directly by the law. 

This, just very quickly, too. Serge Malumbo writes, ‘‘We cannot 

give you exactly the number of lives that are lost each day following the cessation of artisanal mining in the DRC and yet even 

if a child died or who is hungry or do not go to school because his 

father digger lacked money, that is a tragedy, it is a sad news that 

should challenge our humanity.’’ 

I see that my time is up. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. 

[The prepared statement of Mr. Aronson can be found on page 

40 of the appendix.] 

Chairman CAMPBELL. Thank you, Mr. Aronson. 

Next, we will hear from Mr. Mvemba Dizolele, who is a distinguished visiting fellow at the Hoover Institution. He also serves as 

a policy adviser for the Eastern Congo Initiative; lectures at the 

school of Advanced International Studies at Johns Hopkins University; served as an election monitor with the Carter Center in the 

Congo in 2006 and in 2011; and is a veteran of the United States 

Marine Corps. He earned a Bachelor of Arts in Political Science 

and French from Southern Utah University, and has a Master’s of 

Business Administration and a Master’s of Public Policy from the 

University of Chicago. 

Mr. Dizolele, you are recognized for 5 minutes. 

STATEMENT OF MVEMBA PHEZO DIZOLELE, VISITING FELLOW, HOOVER INSTITUTION ON WAR, REVOLUTION AND 

PEACE 

Mr. DIZOLELE. Chairman Campbell, Ranking Member Clay, and 

distinguished members of the subcommittee, thank you for the invitation and honor to testify before your subcommittee today. 

A little over a year ago, I had the privilege, along with other colleagues, to share with members of the subcommittee my perspective and insights about Section 1502 of Dodd-Frank and its conVerDate Nov 24 2008 18:41 Sep 04, 2013 Jkt 081758 PO 00000 Frm 00013 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6633 K:\DOCS\81758.TXT TERRI
8 

sequences for the people of the DRC. I would like to note, however, 

that the views expressed in this statement today are mine and 

mine alone. 

A year is enough time for emotions to cool off and reason and 

honesty to prevail, as we monitor and evaluate Dodd-Frank Section 

1502. It is then quite appropriate for us to look at the unintended 

consequences of this legislation with the informed vantage point of 

time. 

A week ago, I returned from a working trip in the Democratic 

Republic of Congo, where I participated in a conference about the 

Peace, Security, and Cooperation Framework for the Democratic 

Republic of Congo and the so-called ‘‘conflict minerals.’’ The conference brought together Congolese academics, political leaders, 

and representatives of civil society organizations in a memorable 

moment of reflection about ways and means to usher lasting peace 

in Congo and end the illicit and illegal trade and looting of natural 

resources. 

Throughout the conference, I think Kinshasa could not help but 

marvel, as I have done many times before, at the determination 

and commitment of our friends who promoted Section 1502. 

They mobilized thousands of people in a campaign that raised 

awareness of the continued conflict in eastern Congo. The highlevel zeal is the campaign’s main strength. 

Section 1502 seeks to bring peace to the eastern Congo by regulating mineral trade through U.S. law, cleaning up the supply 

chain, and reducing militias’ access to financial means. 

The spirit of the law supposes that such a regulation will de facto 

curb the violence and human rights abuses. 

This campaign, however, has a serious weakness. Proponents of 

Section 1502 built their case on an erroneous premise that claimed 

that minerals were either the source or at the center of the conflict. 

Cutting militias’ access to mines will lead to peace, the argument 

goes. 

Let me suggest then, that the best way to evaluate the consequences of Section 1502 would be to look at its premise, claims 

and impact on institution-building and on the Congolese people. 

Mineral trade in eastern Congo is part of a wider economy which 

can only be regulated either by the most powerful armed groups 

working in collusion, the biggest armed group imposing its way on 

the smaller ones, or by their backers seeking to maximize profit 

and preserve their own interests. 

As such, Section 1502 builds on a weak foundation and requires 

the buy-in of the very negative actors it seeks to tame. 

This approach perverts basic peacemaking models and rewards 

criminals and would-be spoilers. This premise led to a law with the 

following results. First, the U.S. Congress passed legislation that 

ignores the will and agency of the Congolese people and imposed 

an outside solution to a problem that is best understood by the 

Congolese. 

This approach to peacemaking undermines DRC’s strong civil society, which has been working hard over the years to end the 

looting of natural resources. Their actions include the audit of mining contracts, the revision of the mining code, and the call for secuVerDate Nov 24 2008 18:41 Sep 04, 2013 Jkt 081758 PO 00000 Frm 00014 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6633 K:\DOCS\81758.TXT TERRI
9 

rity sector reform and a respect for the transparent and credible 

electoral process. 

Second, the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission, which is 

entrusted with the implementation of this law, is not qualified to 

carry out such a task. The SEC has neither the expertise nor the 

money to conduct a cost-and-benefit analysis of the impact of Section 1502 on the Congolese and U.S. businesses. 

Thus, the SEC had to decide on such a complicated matter affecting the livelihood of millions of people without adequate assessment of the situation on the ground in Congo. 

It was inappropriate to ask the SEC to serve as the primary 

agency to enforce this law. This work is simply outside the agency’s 

scope and mandate. 

Third, Section 1502 perpetrates the dominant, but wrong, narrative that casts the Congolese people as incapable of solving their 

problems and in constant need of outside guidance. 

The truth is that no one understands mining in Congo better 

than the Congolese. By failing to engage the Congolese in an honest dialogue on the relationship between conflict and mining, proponents of Section 1502 failed to spur a national ownership of the 

initiative through a true partnership with the Congolese. 

Fourth, Section 1502 creates what is known as ‘‘Congo fatigue.’’ 

Staffers in both Chambers of Congress work hard to help steer 

U.S.-Congo policy in the direction that best benefits the Congolese 

people. House Members and Senators invest their political capital 

to do the same. 

It is, therefore, disappointing to hear that the legislation they 

passed did not yield the anticipated result because they were misled. Such a realization makes it difficult to engage Members of 

Congress the next time around. 

Fifth— 

Chairman CAMPBELL. Mr. Dizolele, if you could—number five, 

and then wrap up. 

Mr. DIZOLELE. I am almost done, Mr. Chairman. 

Fifth, there is no evidence that Section 1502 has reduced violence 

in the targeted region. In fact, the emergence of the M23 militia 

last spring, which has escalated tensions in the Great Lakes, has 

proved that this law has little bearing on war entrepreneurs. 

The Congo may be a dysfunctional state, perhaps, or even a weak 

state, but this does not mean the Congolese society is weak. 

Thank you very much. 

[The prepared statement of Mr. Dizolele can be found on page 49 

of the appendix.] 

Chairman CAMPBELL. Thank you, Mr. Dizolele. 

Next, we have Mr. Rick Goss, senior vice president of the Information Technology Industry Council, where he directs the development of policy related to green product design, renewable energy, 

and responsible supply chain management. 

He previously worked for the Electronic Industries Alliance as 

the vice president, environmental affairs, on policies such as electronics recycling, green procurement, and product materials content. 

10 

He has a Bachelor of Arts in political science from the University 

of Rochester and a Master’s of Science and Environmental Management from Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute. 

Mr. Goss, thank you for being here. You are recognized for 5 

minutes. 

STATEMENT OF RICK GOSS, SENIOR VICE PRESIDENT OF ENVIRONMENT AND SUSTAINABILITY, INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY INDUSTRY COUNCIL (ITI) 

Mr. GOSS. Thank you very much, Chairman Campbell, Ranking 

Member Clay, and members of the subcommittee for the invitation 

to testify today on this very important topic. 

ITI, my employer, is a global trade association representing 50 

of the world’s most innovative companies in the information and 

communications technology sector. 

Our members have an abiding commitment to sustainability and 

corporate social responsibility, a commitment we have again demonstrated through our strong leadership on conflict minerals. 

While the minerals and metals covered under Section 1502 are 

routinely used by every industry across the global economy, tech 

companies have taken the lead to drive private sector initiatives 

and secure measurable progress. ITI and our members are dedicated to being responsible actors within the context of comprehensive, government-led strategies for Central Africa. 

First, we are committed to ethical sourcing throughout our global 

supply chains. Second, we want to source cleanly from Central Africa to help provide critical economic benefits to local populations. 

With these twin objectives in mind, our sector has made a conscious choice to remain engaged in the region. Our initiatives include launching the conflict-free smelter program, establishing 

clean, in-region sourcing channels in Central Africa, developing and 

promoting supply chain transparency and reporting measures, and, 

finally, joining with governments and civil society in the Public-Private Alliance for Responsible Minerals Trade. 

Based on a long history of credible engagement and concrete 

achievements, the tech sector can bring unique judgments and perspectives on the impacts of Section 1502 and on the broader policy 

debate. 

Let me begin by relating the positive outcomes that Section 1502 

has yielded. First, the public debate on conflict minerals has 

brought desperately needed attention to an outright humanitarian 

crisis that had been largely ignored by the international community. 

Second, the enactment of Section 1502 drove other sectors to join 

with tech to drive policies and transparency measures throughout 

global supply chains. 

And, finally, Section 1502 helped convince regional governments 

to engage more fully in mining sector reforms. 

Section 1502, however, has also created obstacles for companies 

that want to remain responsibly engaged in Central Africa. 

Simply put, the mechanism contained in Section 1502 encourages 

companies to avoid the region, while layering regulatory burdens 

and costs on those that stay. 

11 

This has led to a de facto embargo on minerals from the covered 

region, with serious consequences for local populations. 

Major smelters report that a majority of their direct customers 

are demanding metals that are Congo-free rather than conflict-free. 

Likewise, most companies expend the bulk of their time and resources establishing that they are not sourcing from the region, 

rather than on developing programs that build clean sourcing capacity. 

Also, because of endemic security and corruption challenges, the 

volume of materials processed through legitimate in-region programs to date has been modest. The United Nations reports that 

even as security has improved at some major mining centers, exports of tin, tantalum, and tungsten from the eastern DRC have all 

but halted. The prices for uncertified minerals have plummeted, 

with impoverished artisanal miners earning mere cents on the dollar, while brokers and exporters secure huge profits. 

The societal impacts can be measured in reduced family incomes, 

limited availability of and rising prices for food and medicines, and 

falling school enrollments. 

The United Nations has also documented black market activities 

on conflict minerals and has determined that militias and ‘‘criminal, mafia-type networks’’ within the Congolese army are exploiting 

other sources of revenue through products such as timber, charcoal, 

cannabis, ivory, and basic supplies, and through practices such as 

human trafficking, illegal roadblocks, and extortion. 

Section 1502, by focusing almost exclusively on the role of the 

private sector, has diverted critical attention away from the indispensable role of governments in addressing the endemic political 

security and humanitarian crises in the region. 

Private sector initiatives alone cannot succeed in a region beset 

by rampant conflict and corruption and destabilized by chronic interference and intrusions from neighboring countries. 

The underlying causes of this regional war are political, not economic, and are linked to entrenched ethnic enemies and disputes 

over political power, land rights, and citizenship. 

While control over natural resources is in part responsible for 

fueling violence in eastern Congo, it is striking to note that adjacent areas that are equally rich in resources are not plagued by 

conflict. 

Ultimately, corporate efforts alone are no substitute for comprehensive international engagement. In the absence of this international will, the status quo will reign in the Congo. 

In closing, ITI and our members urge Congress to consider ways 

to overcome the deterrent effects of Section 1502 and to provide incentives to companies that responsibly source from Central Africa. 

These efforts could include lowering the regulatory burden, offering a Federal procurement preference, enacting tax incentives, and 

providing public recognition to those companies that source 

through approved in-region programs. 

The U.S. and other governments can also support in-region 

transparency and governance initiatives, and can place collective 

pressure on foreign smelters to participate in our audit program. 

Finally, the tech sector will continue to embrace our role as part 

of the solution, even as we join with governments and civil society 

12 

to press for more concerted and lasting action from the international community to resolve the unfolding calamity in Central 

Africa. 

Thank you again for the invitation to testify today. 

[The prepared statement of Mr. Goss can be found on page 54 of 

the appendix.] 

Chairman CAMPBELL. Thank you, Mr. Goss. 

That buzz means there is a vote on the Floor, but we will complete the testimony of our witnesses, and then I will recess the 

committee. We will be gone probably about 30 minutes, and then 

we will come back for the questioning phase of the hearing. 

So, Ms. Sophia Pickles, a conflict resources campaigner for Global Witness, which focuses on the eastern Democratic Republic of 

the Congo and the wider Great Lakes region of Central Africa, has 

worked on DRC issues since 2004. She lived in Manono from 2006 

to 2008, and coordinated an all-party parliamentary group focused 

on the Great Lakes region in the U.K. Parliament. 

Ms. Pickles, you are recognized for 5 minutes. 

STATEMENT OF SOPHIA PICKLES, POLICY ADVISOR, GLOBAL 

WITNESS 

Ms. PICKLES. Thank you. 

I would like to thank the Subcommittee on Monetary Policy and 

Trade, in particular Chairman Campbell and Ranking Member 

Clay, for the opportunity to speak with you today. 

My name is Sophia Pickles. I work for Global Witness, a nongovernmental organization that campaigns to break the links between natural resources, corruption, and conflict. 

I lead our campaign on eastern DRC and conflict minerals. My 

work has focused on the African Great Lakes region since 2004, 

and I lived for 2 years in Manono, a mineral trading town in Congo’s Katanga province. 

I travel frequently to eastern Congo to carry out in-depth field 

investigations. These involve visits to mining areas and interviews 

with all stakeholders in the trade, including artisanal miners, and 

mineral traders, mining authorities, representatives of the army, 

and local civil societies. I also meet regularly with ministers and 

other senior officials in the DRC, Rwanda, and Burundi. 

For the last 15 years, armed groups and members of the Congolese national army have used profits from the trade in tin, tantalum, tungsten, and gold to finance themselves and their operations in eastern DRC. Minerals are not the root cause of this conflict, but competition for control of lucrative mine sites has been an 

incentive for warring parties to continue fighting. 

The local population in North and South Kivu provinces has 

borne the brunt of a war characterized by murder, rape, pillage, 

and mass displacement. Section 1502 has generated unprecedented 

scrutiny of supply chains from eastern DRC by requiring U.S.-listed companies to check whether the minerals they use are funding 

armed groups. 

While some industry associations claim that implementing the 

law is too burdensome, company compliance over the past 3 years 

paints a different picture. Collective industry initiatives to support 

13 

due diligence, such as the Conflict-Free Smelter Program launched 

by the electronics industry, emerged as early as 2010. 

SEC-listed companies not previously engaged in the region have 

invested in closed-pipe sourcing initiatives in DRC. Two examples 

are: Solutions for Hope settled in Katanga in 2011; and the Conflict-Free Tin Initiative launched in south Kivu in October 2012. 

A number of companies like Hewlett Packard, Phillips, Intel, and 

Apple have made progress tracing their supply chains as far as the 

smelters and refiners. 

Section 1502 has also catalyzed changes in DRC’s domestic mining sector well before the law’s first implementation year began 

just 5 months ago. The passage of Section 1502 prompted the Congolese government to introduce domestic legislation in 2012, obligating companies operating in its mineral sector to undertake supply-chain due diligence, complementary to that required under Section 1502. The government has since suspended two trading houses 

operating in eastern Congo for failing to do due diligence. In eastern Congo, mineral traders who had previously turned a blind eye 

to the conflict minerals trade have formed a local coalition that promotes the implementation of due diligence and the development of 

conflict-free supply chains. Traders told me that this initiative and 

others like it were developed in response to Section 1502. 

Local oversight and whistle-blowing groups are also emerging. 

Congolese civil society organizations such as Observatoire 

Gouvernance et Paix (OGP) train local communities in how to monitor mining areas and trading routes and report on military or 

armed group involvement. This tie to civil society and community 

engagement is key to disrupting and preventing armed groups from 

accessing illegal revenues from the minerals trade. 

Proper implementation of Section 1502 has the potential to substantially improve the socioeconomic situation of artisanal mining 

communities. These communities are extremely vulnerable to the 

activities of rebel groups and to the abusive factions of the Congolese army. 

Insecurity caused by the presence of armed groups that prey on 

the mines and trading routes is one of the main drivers for sustained poverty in artisanal mining communities, limiting access to 

agricultural fields and markets and impacting household incomes, 

and the ability to pay for things like school fees. 

Challenges remain. The number of companies doing due diligence 

and sourcing from eastern Congo is still limited, largely as a result 

of the uncertainty created by the SEC’s 16-month delay in publishing the law’s final rule. 

It is too early to measure the impact of due diligence on a wide 

scale. But opportunities for conflict-free sourcing from eastern DRC 

are emerging. The law has led to changes in how companies approach supply chain management. It has catalyzed reform as 

DRC’s domestic mining sector and spurred development of a regional mineral certification system. 

Increased scrutiny of certain mines and mineral trading routes 

is gradually creating opportunities for transparent and conflict-free 

sourcing. 

Thank you, and I look forward to your questions. 

14 

[The prepared statement of Ms. Pickles can be found on page 60 

of the appendix.] 

Chairman CAMPBELL. Thank you, Ms. Pickles. 

We will now recess the committee. We should be back from these 

votes in about 35 minutes or so. 

The committee is in recess. 

[recess] 

Chairman CAMPBELL. I tried to hit the gavel a little softer that 

time, so I didn’t startle any of you out there. 

Thank you for your patience. The votes are over, and the committee will now return to order and be back in session. 

So with the testimony of the witnesses having been completed, 

we are now into the questioning phase of the committee. I will now 

recognize myself for 5 minutes for questions. 

And my first question will be to Mr. Aronson, Mr. Dizolele, and 

Mr. Goss. Ms. Pickles mentioned several different activities that 

large companies—Apple and some others that you mentioned— 

were taking in the Congo to try and distinguish in the DRC between the minerals that might fund some of the rebel activities and 

so forth versus others. 

Are any of the 3 of you aware of those activities? Do you agree 

that those things are happening? Are they effective? Are they noneffective? I would just like some comments from the three of you 

on what she said. 

Mr. ARONSON. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman, for that 

question. I would say two things. First of all, there are, in fact, a 

plethora of initiatives under way. In fact, as the Poly Institute has 

written, the number of different international initiatives to deal 

with Congolese minerals is astounding and itself becoming increasingly problematic. There are so many initiatives under way and 

they are all sort of dealing with the same actors. And they are all 

trying to apply similar but not identical standards. 

And so the Poly Institute, which is a Goma-based local Congolese-owned think tank, said that the multiplication of uncoordinated visits from many different purposes are generally regarded 

by economic operators on the ground as auditing activities with related increase in audit fatigue. Participants warned against the increase in conflict minerals tourism that fails to deliver concrete results. 

I would say that some of those initiatives under way are having 

very mixed results. As, in fact, Ms. Pickles demonstrated in her excellent report on recent developments in eastern Congo under— 

with Global Witness. For example, she pointed out that a project 

in Yabibwe that has produced a few hundred tons of product and 

that is being, I think, underwritten by the Dutch, perhaps in conjunction with the United States, is widely viewed as a test case for 

responsible sourcing. 

However, there are increasing allegations that it is being exploited by a military-led smuggling racket. So these initiatives that 

are under way, there are a large number of them. They are to some 

extent redundant and to some extent they are already deeply compromised. 

Chairman CAMPBELL. Mr. Goss? 

Mr. GOSS. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

15 

Obviously, ITI represents a great number of the tech companies 

that are involved in Central Africa. I would also mention the Solutions for Hope initiative and the Conflict-Free Tin Initiative here. 

I mentioned in my testimony the public-private alliance that the 

U.S. State Department and the USAID have put together. Twothirds of the private corporations participating in that effort are 

tech companies here. 

And what I would say is, yes, we have had some limited success 

in terms of putting together so-called ‘‘closed-pipe’’ systems to generate conflict-free material, mostly tantalum and tin, that can then 

go into our conflict-free smelter program. But the volumes are modest and the challenges are most of the programs are being run in 

non-conflict areas within the DRC or within neighboring countries 

covered by Section 1502. 

And so there is a foothold there, but really what is lacking are 

the broader security efforts in the Kivus and in neighboring countries here to try to bring more conditions of peace and security to 

allow these programs to expand. 

Chairman CAMPBELL. Okay. 

Mr. Dizolele? 

Mr. DIZOLELE. Mr. Chairman, there are a lot of initiatives that 

have taken place now, but the challenge is these initiatives from 

the Congolese side, at least, on both sides, actually, is that they do 

the bare minimum to fit the narrative, what is demanded of them 

from this side of the world. 

That also means the networks are still controlled by the same 

elements, meaning war criminals who often control even those 

mines that are supposed to be clean. So I think we have a challenge where we are looking at the process, looking at the appearance of the process, and not digging deep into the substance of 

what is happening or not happening. 

If the goal is in fact to reduce violence, and these criminals are 

still bypassing the system, as we see from the emergence of the 

M23 militia, then we are still at ground zero. 

Thank you. 

Chairman CAMPBELL. Okay. Thank you. 

And I was going to turn next to Ms. Pickles, so I will just mention this, and then maybe we will get to it later. And I was going 

to ask you, conversely, versus what the 3 of them had mentioned 

about how many groups or companies, which seemed pretty easy— 

the easiest way to do this is just avoid the DRC or perhaps even 

avoid the African continent completely when acquiring things, and 

your comments on that. 

But my time has expired, so I will yield now to the ranking member of the subcommittee, the gentleman from Missouri, Mr. Clay, 

for 5 minutes. 

Mr. CLAY. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

Mr. Dizolele, according to your testimony, violence has increased 

due to the Dodd-Frank Act. And in one part of your testimony, you 

say Section 1502 has reduced violence. There is no evidence that 

this section has reduced violence in the targeted region. In fact, the 

emergence of the M23 militia last spring, which escalated things in 

the Great Lakes, is proof that this law has little bearing on war 

entrepreneurs. 

16 

And you talked about how in the Congo, businesses are not the 

enemies. Armed groups and their international local backers are. 

Give me examples of who local backers are. 

Mr. DIZOLELE. Thank you, Ranking Member Clay. 

I start in my testimony by saying there is a premise to this legislation. The premise was very clear, that by cutting funds to the militias, we will see a downward trend in violence. We have not seen 

it. We have seen the emergence of a set of militias. We can go 

through the alphabet soup of their names, but they are there. The 

M23, which is the biggest that has emerged, if we have been following the reports documented to the U.N. group of experts, to the 

U.S. intelligence and the State Department itself, is a group that 

receives a lot of outside backers. The country that has been pointed 

to mostly has been Rwanda, and sometimes Uganda. These countries have denied involvement, but those are some of the outside 

backers that I am talking about. 

Mr. CLAY. And you also say that this section perpetrates the 

dominant, but wrong narrative. It casts the Congolese people as incapable of solving their problems and in constant need of outside 

guidance. 

Do you want to expand on that for me? 

Mr. DIZOLELE. Very much so, Ranking Member Clay. 

There is a narrative that has emerged on Congo, which is always 

a mess. There is always war and the entire place is in chaos. What 

is lost in that narrative is that you have a very resourceful people 

who are holding the country together. They have been doing this 

through a set of initiatives. And I am talking particularly here 

about the civil society organizations have been at the forefront of 

reforms in DRC. So they really don’t need people to come and push 

them in a direction that often doesn’t benefit them. 

What they need is partnership with outside groups that care. Because, after all, advocacy needs to be in solidarity with the affected 

people. 

Mr. CLAY. And I find it intriguing in one part of your statement 

where you say the campaign, however, has a serious weakness. 

Proponents of Section 1502 built their case on an erroneous 

premise that claims the minerals were either the source or at the 

center of the conflict. Cutting militias’ access to them will lead to 

peace, the argument goes. And that has not happened? 

Mr. DIZOLELE. Yes, sir. That has not happened. That is the example I have given. If you live in the far reaches of North Kivu, 

if you are a woman—let’s use the case of women—the statute has 

not changed your chances of being raped when you go to the field, 

because the field has been infested by armed groups. 

So what difference does it make to a 17-year-old who lives in village X in North Kivu when she goes to the field? She pays the 

same consequences. If you go to post-Section 1502 Africa, if you go 

to Ponzi, you see that the number of rapes has not decreased. 

Those are some of the indicators we should be looking at. 

Mr. CLAY. Expound for me on the statement where you say this 

approach perverts basic peacemaking models and rewards criminals and would-be spoilers. 

Mr. DIZOLELE. Sir, in order for us to bring peace in the Great 

Lakes region, especially in the Kivus, we need a justice component. 

17 

If there is no justice component to go after these militias or these 

leaders, some of them wear the Congolese general stars, at these 

controlled mines. Some of them are sitting happily in Kigali and 

were receiving them here. 

So whatever we do does not affect them. That is what I mean by 

they are above this labeling, above all the law, all this legislation. 

They are not affected. 

Mr. CLAY. Okay. And you are also very critical of the Securities 

and Exchange Commission. According to you, it has neither the expertise nor the money to conduct a cost-and-benefit analysis of the 

impact of this section. Give me your thoughts behind that. 

Mr. DIZOLELE. Part of the arguments about the unintended consequences of Section 1502 is what impact does it have. And nobody 

has been able to carry out this study. Now, this is an international 

affairs issue we are talking about. We are talking about a sovereign country with a government that may or may not be on board 

with what we are doing. And then we are asking a U.S. agency 

that doesn’t deal with international affairs to carry out legislation 

that is affecting a sovereign government and a sovereign people. 

The discussion—some people think the costs rise up to about $71 

billion. If that is true, then we should have some studies to fall on, 

so we can have a sensible discussion. 

Mr. CLAY. Thank you for your response, and my time is up. 

Mr. Chairman, I want to submit for the record one more— 

Chairman CAMPBELL. No, you have reached your limit of submissions to the record. No, just kidding. 

[laughter] 

What do you have? 

Mr. CLAY. Mr. McDermott of Washington State would like to 

submit his statement. 

Chairman CAMPBELL. Without objection, it is so ordered. 

Mr. CLAY. Thank you. 

Chairman CAMPBELL. I now recognize the vice chairman of the 

subcommittee, the gentleman from Michigan, Mr. Huizenga, for 5 

minutes. 

Mr. HUIZENGA. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

I am going to try and move quickly. Obviously, this is very jarring and chilling testimony, I think, of anybody who has seen either video or read some of the accounts of what is going on. And 

I am hoping for some help unpacking a few of the players and getting some opinions, Ms. Pickles and Mr. Dizolele, and the others 

as well. 

One of the questions is, would there be a conflict if there was no 

minerals present? And, I don’t want to put words in your mouth, 

so I would just like to hear, maybe just right down the—Mr. 

Aronson, if you don’t mind. Do you believe that there would be a 

conflict in the DRC right now if there were no minerals that were 

being fought over? 

Mr. ARONSON. I guess I get to start. 

Yes, clearly, there would be a variety of not just a conflict, but 

a variety of different conflicts under way. These conflicts are— 

Mr. HUIZENGA. I am assuming religious, ethnic, tribal, and— 

Mr. ARONSON. Right. Over citizenship, over chieftancy issues, 

over succession issues, over land issues—all of these. And the enaVerDate Nov 24 2008 18:41 Sep 04, 2013 Jkt 081758 PO 00000 Frm 00023 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6633 K:\DOCS\81758.TXT TERRI
18 

bling context is that there is such a weak governing structure in 

place that the government is unable to do the sort of the minimum 

necessity of a state, which is to impose order. 

Mr. HUIZENGA. Yes, okay. And does everybody sort of agree with 

that? Mr. Dizolele? Mr. Goss? 

Mr. DIZOLELE. I agree. 

Mr. HUIZENGA. Okay. 

Mr. GOSS. I agree, as well. 

Ms. PICKLES. I agree, but I think it is important that we recognize the role that minerals have played in perpetuating the conflict 

for 15 years. 

Mr. HUIZENGA. Okay. I am not dismissing that. I just want to try 

to get that. 

And I am also curious—was the government really consulted or 

brought in as a partner on this when it was passed into DoddFrank? Ms. Pickles, if you care to address that? You are pretty critical of any sort of—sour on any sort of discussion about repealing 

this or rolling it back. So if you could maybe address that, and then 

we can kind of quickly work back the other way? 

Ms. PICKLES. The Congolese government has made public statements in support of Section 1502, and has submitted those to the 

SEC, to the public record. 

Mr. HUIZENGA. But is that universal? Because we were hearing 

testimony from Mr. Dizolele that that was not necessarily the view. 

Ms. PICKLES. I think there is a divergence of views in Congo, as 

there would be in any country in the world over any piece of legislation. When I go to Congo, I meet people who very strongly support Section 1502 in the Congolese government and in provincial 

mining authorities in North and South Kivu and in the artisanal 

mining community. 

At the same time, there are other people who don’t support the 

legislation. 

Mr. HUIZENGA. And quickly, do any of the other three of you care 

to address that notion of government involvement and approval— 

the Congolese government adding its stamp of approval? 

Mr. DIZOLELE. Actually, I can—I think when I talked about Congolese not being consulted, this is something that affects the future 

of Congo and the people of Congo’s livelihood. Just to give you an 

example, the SEC held a roundtable 2 years ago it was, or a year 

ago—right before the vote. You had 16 panelists, and among those 

panelists, there was not one single Congolese. 

The main person—the foremost expert of the DRC government is 

a fellow by the name of Paul Margolia. Paul Margolia and the chief 

of staff of the Ministry of Mine had flown from Congo. They were 

not on the panel. They sat in the audience with everyone else. 

So the Congolese voice, as far as we are concerned, was never 

heard in any official way. 

They were maybe given a chance to submit letters, but we don’t 

know what those letters say. 

Mr. HUIZENGA. Okay. 

Mr. DIZOLELE. So the fact that you discussed the future of a 

country’s wealth without any Congolese voices is very disturbing. 

Mr. HUIZENGA. In my remaining minute, I am curious, what constitutes a ‘‘clean’’ mine? What makes it acceptable, kosher to the 

19 

world market? And, as I think Mr. Dizolele pointed out a little bit, 

that who is in charge, it might be peaceful, but it might not be the 

right people that we want in charge. 

And, Ms. Pickles, I don’t know if you would care to address that, 

and we will work back as well here? We have about 40 seconds. 

Ms. PICKLES. For a mine to be conflict-free, we have to apply 

principles of due diligence, so companies have to make sure that 

they are not supporting armed groups or rebels who are in the 

mine site. And the communities have to be involved in that as well 

as the Congolese government. 

Mr. HUIZENGA. Mr. Dizolele? 

Mr. DIZOLELE. I think there is another problem. I have visited 

some of the mines. Not every mine has militias in it. Some mines 

have children. So when we have children in mines, what do we call 

it? Is it conflict-free, because there are no armed groups? Are there 

child labor issues? 

Does it fit in a green color or does it fit in the red? 

This is part of the challenge with this characterization of the 

mines. 

Thank you, sir. 

Mr. HUIZENGA. I appreciate that. 

I know my time has expired, and, Mr. Chairman, I, again, just 

want to say thank you for exploring this. And I hope at some point, 

we can maybe put together a trip that actually goes and explores 

this firsthand as well. So, thank you. 

Chairman CAMPBELL. I thank the vice chairman. 

And now we turn to the gentlelady from Wisconsin, Ms. Moore, 

for her questions. You have 5 minutes. 

Ms. MOORE. Thank you so much, Mr. Chairman. 

And I want to thank each and every panelist for taking the time 

and staying here while we went out to vote, because this is a very 

complicated subject. And it is hard to know what to do. 

You said in your testimony, Mr. Dizolele, it is just—what does 

that mean? It is for us, with us, it is between us. 

I think that with Dodd-Frank, as you all have stipulated, there 

was a sincere effort to try to make sure that we did something to 

promote transparency and about these conflict diamonds. And so, 

as we look at it from a cost-benefit analysis, there may be a cost 

to these companies which Ms. Pickles has pointed out has with the 

short period of time that this regulation has been in place—has 

self-complied with this regulation and our ability to stabilize, to 

Mr. Dizolele’s point to stop slavery, because many of these miners 

were just mining at gunpoint. 

And so, I guess the question I can start with is, Mr. Aronson, you 

say that this is misplaced. Do you think Ms. Pickles made a good 

point when she said that maybe we haven’t had enough time to see 

whether or not this is good policy? 

Mr. ARONSON. I guess I respectfully disagree with Ms. Pickles. 

There is no evidence that it is going to have a positive impact. 

There have been a dozen independent studies and reports by independent and respected NGOs and scholars, all of which have concluded that it has had negative impacts— 

20 

Ms. MOORE. So if we were to just repeal this law, do you think 

that the violence would be eliminated and that these criminals 

would go away? 

Mr. ARONSON. I don’t think it would have any significant impact 

on the law—on the ground either way—I think—in terms of the violence. I think it might restore their livelihood to a bunch of miners, and that would be a net positive. 

Ms. MOORE. We had heard from the bishops, I think that has already been put in the record, that this is a smaller part of the economy than we think, and the people who were involved in the economy were doing so at really meager, not even wages, near slave 

wages. 

Is that a mischaracterization of the kind of income opportunity 

that was provided through mining, even before Dodd-Frank? 

Mr. ARONSON. I believe it is. Certainly, at the mines that I went 

out to see, miners were making $13 to $15 per kilo. That translated 

to about $2 to $3 a day. That sounds awful, but— 

Ms. MOORE. It does sound awful. 

Let me ask some more questions—I don’t mean to be rude. 

I want to ask some questions of Mr. Dizolele. 

You have said that the army has been—that we are outsiders 

who are doing things. But this has had a very deep impact on what 

the military has done. They have not—they are not allowed in the 

mine. The Congolese government has introduced domestic legislation requiring companies to operate its sectors and to identify the 

supply chain. 

A group of mineral traders in North Kivu, NGOs, they founded 

an organization that promotes the use of OECD. 

Did you think that these are not beneficial in the long run? I 

know short run, it has been a terrible thing, but don’t you think— 

see where the government and military and NGOs in the area are 

taking some responsibility toward transparency? 

Mr. DIZOLELE. Thank you very much, Congresswoman. 

No, I think you misunderstand a couple of things. 

One, go back to the premise that minerals are not causing the 

conflict. So as long as minerals are not the source or the reason for 

the conflict, we are missing the point. We are doing something very 

important and very commendable, so we do appreciate the attention. 

But, as I said earlier, if you are Sifa, living in North Kivu, and 

you cannot plant your field because the militia is still present, then 

this— 

Ms. MOORE. But we need some other sort of— 

Mr. DIZOLELE. You need—most initiative. 

Ms. MOORE. Okay. Ms. Pickles, I have 2 seconds, so give me your 

thoughts on why we ought to continue this initiative, despite the 

objection from the other side. 

Ms. PICKLES. Because we have already seen progress. We have 

already seen companies—sourcing—the conflict resourcing is happening in the Kivus now. And it is already bringing stability to 

communities where closed-pipe systems have been set up, and that 

is bringing economic development. 

I would say to the point about artisanal miners and their livelihoods, as long as there are armed groups preying on the trade and 

21 

preying on the north trading routes, people will not be able to access their fields; there will be instability. And that will have a negative economic effect on the ground. 

Ms. MOORE. Thank you so much. 

And thank you, Mr. Chairman, for your indulgence. 

Chairman CAMPBELL. Thank you. 

The gentleman from Indiana, Mr. Stutzman, is now recognized 

for 5 minutes. 

Mr. STUTZMAN. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

And thank you to the panel for being here, and this interesting 

yet, I guess, sad situation at the same time. 

I would like to ask a question regarding the market in general 

and how has Section 1502—has it distorted the market, has it manipulated the market at all? 

Mr. Goss, or anyone on the panel, if you would like to address 

that? 

Mr. Goss, I guess I will start with you. 

Mr. GOSS. Thank you, Congressman. The impacts of 1502, I 

think it is clear from my fellow panelists here, are very complicated 

in terms of the actual impact on the ground in the DRC. 

I will start my response by noting that I agree in part with my 

colleagues to my right and also with my colleague on the left here. 

The core issue here is not over the minerals. Let’s not forget that 

in 1994, we had 800,000 people killed in 100 days in and around 

Rwanda. 

This was not over minerals. This was over politics. It was over 

ethnic tensions. It was over generations-old disputes here. 

There are other equally rich areas of the Congo that are not 

prone to this type of conflict. This is a political battle that is going 

on in eastern Congo here. 

The effects of Section 1502, yes, to some extent I would agree 

with Ms. Pickles that, yes, part of this—and I said so in my testimony—part of this is control over natural resources in those areas 

is helping to fuel or prolong some of the conflict there. I don’t think 

that is at issue here. 

The question is, will Section 1502, yes or no, solve the overall 

conflict? It certainly has had the impact of precipitously dropping 

the output in the Kivus in particular here. 

I would say that there is virtually no conflict-free sourcing going 

on in the Kivus. Hardly any at all here, given the ongoing conflict. 

Most of the— 

Mr. STUTZMAN. So you would say, then, there is not even another 

commodity that is—is there another commodity that is causing violence? You are saying this is outside of any sort of minerals, outside of any of the resources that are part of the country? This is 

a deeper problem than just politically? There is—it goes back to 

ethnic tension. 

Mr. GOSS. Yes. I would say that there is a far deeper, far more 

comprehensive set of issues at play here than simply control over 

minerals. 

And there are certainly other things, other than minerals, other 

commodities, such as the ones I mentioned in my testimony, that 

are also being used for illegal gain and to fund not only militias, 

but illicit bands within the government military as well here. 

22 

I know from meeting with the European Commission most recently, just a few weeks ago in Paris, they certainly see DoddFrank, and this is their term, as a market distortion, that it has 

forced responsible industries out of the region, to the detriment of 

the local populations. 

In fact, part of what they are considering as they move forward 

on a potential legislative initiative is to look—and again, this is 

their term, how do we restore the marketplace, how do we restore 

balance, how do we encourage companies, responsible companies, to 

engage or re-engage in the region? 

Hence, some of the recommendations I made at the end of my 

testimony. 

Mr. STUTZMAN. If I could, Mr. Dizolele, would you agree with 

that? 

And then, also, do you know, was the Congolese government consulted regarding Section 1502 when it was passed? 

Mr. DIZOLELE. Thank you very much, Congressman. 

The Congolese government reacted to Section 1502, so in many 

ways, they were pushed into it. The first reaction, even before the 

law was voted, was President Kabila suspending mining in that region, which had a negative effect even before the United States 

passed its law. 

So, were they consulted? On the periphery. They were—it was a 

very, very—consultation. Like I said, the foremost experts of the 

Ministry of Mining in Congo were not even part of the panel that 

discussed Dodd-Frank at the SEC. They sat in the audience with 

the rest of us, when, in fact, those of us who follow Congo, we had 

wanted to hear from them. 

Because they live with this; they know their laws. They have 

been engaged by the World Bank. 

The World Bank has a good program in DRC called Promene. 

I think the activists who want this thing need to join forces with 

those groups in Congo to have something that is much more comprehensive. And also, we cannot pass laws on one section of Congo 

as if it was one country, when in fact there are many areas which 

are much more mineral rich, but don’t have the same effect. There 

is no war in Kananga over mines. There is no war in the Kasai 

province over diamonds. So this tells us that the problem is bigger 

than what we are trying to address—unfortunately. 

Mr. STUTZMAN. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

Chairman CAMPBELL. Thank you. 

Next, the gentleman from South Carolina, Mr. Mulvaney, is recognized for 5 minutes. 

Mr. MULVANEY. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

And thank you to the witnesses. 

It is sort of hard to know where to begin on this. I am going to 

ignore my biggest concern here, and my biggest concern is that this 

is the Financial Services Committee and that we are dealing with 

Dodd-Frank, which was supposedly the response to the financial 

crisis of 2008 and 2009, and for some reason, we are sitting in here 

today talking about conflict minerals in the Congo. 

How we got here—I know exactly how we got here. You shouldn’t 

be here, by the way. We shouldn’t be here. We shouldn’t be doing 

this. This committee should be—this hearing should be taking 

23 

place in the Foreign Affairs Committee or the Energy and Commerce Committee or the Ways and Means Committee. 

But we are here because somebody back during the last minutes 

of Dodd-Frank thought they were smarter than everybody else and 

really slick and could figure out a way to slip something into a bill 

late at night that would pass into law, somebody who thought that 

they knew better than everybody else and didn’t need congressional 

hearings, didn’t need an amendment process, didn’t need the mining experts from the country that is actually going to be impacted 

and decided that their intentions were good enough to go ahead 

and slip this into law. 

And that is absurd. I think it is a test case, Mr. Chairman, for 

exactly what is broken about the system. But, again, I am going 

to ignore it and try and keep things really simple for me as a new 

member of this committee. And my question is really simple, which 

is, are the Congolese people better off because of Section 1502 of 

Dodd-Frank? And what I have heard so far from Mr. Aronson is 

that they are not; from Mr. Dizolele, I have heard that they have 

not. 

Sitting here, I am looking at some of the testimony from the folks 

who actually live in the country—heaven forbid we actually ask the 

people who were impacted—who said that, ‘‘Even in our large 

towns, economic activity has diminished. Construction slowed. 

Trade in everything has fallen. People with very little to begin with 

are now doing with less.’’ 

Ms. Pickles, I hear what you are saying. I have read your testimony as well. I think I hear what your defense is, which is that 

proper implementation of Section 1502 has the potential to substantially improve socioeconomic—I will be perfectly candid with 

you. My 13-year-old triplets have the potential to improve the conditions in the Congo. That doesn’t mean they are going to, but they 

certainly have the potential to do that, right? 

You are telling us that we have to sit and wait. These gentlemen 

are telling us the country is worse off. You are telling us to sit and 

wait. So I only have one question: How long do we have to wait? 

If we come back a year from now, and these gentlemen are still 

saying things are worse, will that be enough or will we have to 

wait longer? 

How long do we have to wait before we repeal this? I would repeal it today, because it is absurd that it is there in the first place. 

So just tell me that, how long do we have to wait? 

Ms. PICKLES. You don’t have to wait, it has already started, is 

my answer to that. If you look at the other parts of my testimony, 

you will see that conflict-free sourcing has already started in eastern Congo. 

Mr. MULVANEY. Yes, you said sourcing. That is better for the— 

for who, the fact that there are now secure supply lines? I am looking at the actual impact on the people. I am looking at the woman 

that Mr. Dizolele talked about who was getting raped in the fields 

before Section 1502 and is still getting raped in the fields afterward, and probably will after all the secure supply chains in the 

world go in there. 

I hear what you are saying. You said that there is stability in 

economic development. Again, I go back to the folks who actually 

24 

live there who say that millions of artisanal miners—I had to look 

that up, by the way; it means subsistence miners—have suddenly 

had their livelihood cut out from under them. They find it increasingly difficult to pay for school, health or maternity fees. Some 

even have reported difficulty providing food for their families. 

How is that making them better? 

Ms. PICKLES. I think there are two sides to that story. I have a 

quote here from a group in Congo that says for 15 years, dire poverty and slavery-like conditions, exacerbated by the nonexistence of 

basic social infrastructure and caused by the trade in conflict minerals, has affected our communities and made us worse off. 

Mr. MULVANEY. Where is the next part of that sentence? Where 

is the next part of the sentence that says, ‘‘and now it is better.’’ 

Do you have that? 

Ms. PICKLES. No, sir, not— 

Mr. MULVANEY. Everybody admits that things were bad in the 

past. The question is whether or not Section 1502 is making it better. Where is the evidence that it is making it better? 

Ms. PICKLES. When I was in Nabibwe, which is one of the mining 

communities that has been—where conflict resourcing has started—3 weeks ago, I spoke to individuals who told me that their economic circumstances have improved because of the conflict 

resourcing that has begun there. 

For example, somebody told me that the could now start a bakery because there was a consistent supply chain coming out of 

Congo and that he could then use that economic base to start his 

own business. 

Mr. MULVANEY. And he couldn’t start a bakery before? 

Ms. PICKLES. No, he couldn’t, because there were armed groups 

in the area who were preventing him from being able to access the 

roads, for example. 

Mr. MULVANEY. This is not going to get undone. I know that it 

isn’t. I appreciate you having the hearing. I hope that our friends 

on the other side and our friends in the Senate recognize that as 

important as Dodd-Frank is, and I know that it is, and as important as this issue is, there was no reason for this issue to be dealt 

with in Dodd-Frank. And if we were going to do something this 

year, maybe we could at least move this over to a committee that 

has some understanding of the issue. 

This is not what this committee is set up to do. It is not what 

Dodd-Frank is set up to do. And I appreciate the opportunity for 

the hearing. 

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

Chairman CAMPBELL. Thank you, Mr. Mulvaney. 

We now move up the road a piece to North Carolina, to Mr. 

Pittenger. You are recognized for 5 minutes. 

Mr. PITTENGER. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

And thank you, witnesses, for your testimonies. 

I would like to pick up a little bit on Mr. Mulvaney’s comments 

and questions. It seems to me, in our reports we have heard that 

there are 1 million to 2 million people who are displaced, they have 

lost their livelihood, because of what they refer to as ‘‘Obama’s 

law.’’ 

25 

Mr. Dizolele, what are these people doing today? What are those 

folks doing to take care of their families—to take care of their children, their education? What is happening to them? 

Mr. DIZOLELE. Congressman, it is a very important question. 

They are surviving—some starving, some in IDP camps and waiting for a handout. And I think this is my primary contention. 

These are people who are very resourceful, who can tend to their 

own field, who can feed themselves. 

As long as the conflict continues, they are reduced to pretty 

much asking for handouts. And until we address the political side 

that is causing the conflict, legislation like this will have minimal 

effect in changing the lives of those who are in the condition you 

just described. 

Mr. PITTENGER. Mr. Dizolele, do you make the correlation that 

Section 1502 translated into the displacement of these 1 million to 

2 million people? 

Mr. DIZOLELE. No, I do not make such a correlation. I think Section 1502, as I said in my remarks, is operating outside the realm 

of the violence in the sense that the network of war criminals that 

benefits from this market-like illicit trade of minerals, above DoddFrank. Congresswoman Moore had asked about the mines being 

free of the military. Yes, they may be free of people in uniform, 

that doesn’t necessarily mean they are free of military influences, 

because some of the generals are in the mines. 

Mr. PITTENGER. But since the implementation of the bill, my 

question is—there seems to be a timing that these people were displaced and some connection to when this bill came into effect. 

Mr. DIZOLELE. Congressman, in eastern Congo, people get displaced all the time, because the conflict has been quasi-permanent. 

The conflict started in 1994 and has been going on until today. 

Goma is about to fall as we speak today. Goma is under pressure, 

so we don’t know if Goma is going to last until Saturday. If it 

does—if Goma falls to the militias, then there will be more displaced people. 

So displacement itself is not related to— 

Mr. PITTENGER. It is ongoing. 

Do you see any resolution, then, with the—if by chance that this 

Section 1502 was removed? Are you an advocate of that? 

Mr. DIZOLELE. I am not an advocate of Section 1502. 

Mr. PITTENGER. Are you an advocate of it being removed from 

the law? 

Mr. DIZOLELE. I cannot speak to that. I think that is why we are 

having this hearing. Your subcommittee will make that decision. I 

do believe, however, that the best way to help Congo is through a 

multidimensional approach. There have been other countries that 

faced similar crises, like Sierra Leone had conflict that was fueled 

by mining, by diamonds. But going after diamonds alone didn’t 

bring peace to Sierra Leone or Liberia. We need more initiatives 

to bring peace to Congo. The reinstatement of the authority of the 

state is key, not going after small pieces of the crisis. 

Mr. PITTENGER. Thank you. 

Would anybody else care to comment on that? 

I yield the balance of my time. 

Ms. PICKLES. Yes, I would like to comment. 

26 

I think we have to be careful not to conflate the broader conflict 

in Congo and breaking the link between minerals and conflict. I 

agree with what you are saying, Mr. Dizolele, that we do have to 

take a holistic approach if we want to find long-term peace and stability in Congo. But breaking the link between the minerals trade 

and the armed groups is a really important way of preventing them 

from receiving funding from a very lucrative revenue source. 

And that is what Section 1502 is trying to do. We are trying to 

create clean supply chains from Congo so that American businesses 

can source from this area responsibly. 

Mr. GOSS. May I add to that? What we have seen in the tech sector here is that our attempts to make a go in-region, to try to create these closed-pipe sourcing have been, I would say, minimally 

successful because of the ongoing and broader security issues here, 

in the Kivus in particular, the conflict regions here. 

As the private sector, we clearly see that we have a role as part 

of a solution here, but it really needs to be first and foremost a solution that is led by the international community. The international community needs to create the preconditions to allow private sector programs to work in this area, and right now we 

haven’t seen that. What we have—in effect, the U.N. has rated 

Congo absolutely last on the human development index—187 out of 

187. 

We have a western-style disclosure regime and an OECD due 

diligence guidance approach that we are trying to put in play in 

that set of circumstances. And frankly, as hard as we try, we are 

not able to get it to hold. There needs to be more leadership from 

the international community to create those conditions. 

Thank you. 

Chairman CAMPBELL. Thank you, Mr. Pittenger. 

With the indulgence of the panel, we are going to do one more 

round of questions, which seems to be the consensus up here. So 

if you all have another 20 or 25 minutes, we will take one more 

round and go through. 

So, with that, I will recognize myself again for a fresh 5 minutes 

on the second round, and I will go to what I addressed Ms. Pickles 

about in the first round, and we didn’t get around to answering, 

which was your response to the 3 gentlemen at the table. 

Actually, I am going to back up. This artisanal, which I have now 

heard pronounced about 3 different times, and I think I have pronounced it two different ways myself—so I will say artisan miners 

or subsistence miners, can someone actually describe to us what 

that is? Just what is a person in the DRC who is an artisan 

miner—what does that person look like, do, et cetera? 

Mr. Dizolele? 

Mr. ARONSON. I will take a stab at answering that question. An 

artisanal miner is usually someone who lives in the—is often someone who lives in the neighborhood; has some relationship to existing local power relationships, power structure. And they spend 

their day in extremely physically arduous, to a certain extent highly dangerous activities. They dig holes in the ground and— 

Chairman CAMPBELL. I’m sorry. Are they in a mine underground 

that is owned by somebody else, as we think of a miner in the 

27 

United States? Or are they sitting on the ground with a spade, 

digging around to see what they can find? Or are they both? 

Mr. ARONSON. Both, I would suggest. I would suggest the whole 

anthropology of sort of the local context is very complicated, and it 

is important to sort of understand it varies from mine to mine and 

from region to region and subregion. But effectively, they are working the land of their village. They may have to pay fees to the local 

chief. They may have to pay fees to the local police. 

Chairman CAMPBELL. Pretty primitive stuff, in other words. 

Mr. ARONSON. Yes, yes. 

Chairman CAMPBELL. Okay. Now, if I can— 

Mr. ARONSON. And it is a hole that literally is about a meter 

wide and it goes sometimes 100 meters or 200 meters into the 

ground, at times. 

Chairman CAMPBELL. Okay. Now, if I can go to Ms. Pickles. 

So what these 3 gentlemen are saying is that Section 1502 has 

actually hurt people in the DRC—these people, these artisanal 

miners. And that it has hurt them by the fact that many entities 

or businesses or companies or whatever in the United States have 

decided rather than try and figure this whole thing out, I am just 

going to avoid anything from anywhere near the DRC, because that 

is the simplest way for me to comply with Section 1502, and that 

these people have been hurt. 

Is there any legitimacy to that claim? What is your view on their 

argument there? 

Ms. PICKLES. I think the first thing to say, just in addition to the 

point about artisanal miners, is that I just want to quote something that the African Union has written in their 2015 mining vision, which is that it is important to recognize that artisanal mining is both poverty-driven and a poverty-alleviating finite activity. 

So in DRC, we are talking about people who may not choose to 

go artisanal mining, but may have to. But it also, in other circumstances, is people who have been forced to by armed groups. So 

I think it is a mixed picture, and we should bear that in mind 

when we are talking about artisanal livelihoods and artisanal communities, as a first point. 

Chairman CAMPBELL. Has the total sale, if you will, of minerals 

from the DRC, particularly from those areas of the DRC, as Mr. 

Dizolele said, that may be not—that are not in a conflict area—has 

that dropped? 

Ms. PICKLES. There has been—exports have been depressed over 

the last few years for a number of reasons. One of them is a presidential mining ban that was introduced in 2010 by the Congolese 

government. Another one is the long delay that the SEC’s—the 16- 

month delay the SEC took before publishing their final rule, which 

caused uncertainty in supply chains, so some companies aren’t yet 

sourcing from Congo, in every sense of the way. 

And then also, recently, there have been export bans introduced 

by the Congolese government again, since May of last year, which 

have prevented people from exporting formally from Congo. 

So all of those things combined— 

Chairman CAMPBELL. Do you believe that will change then, over 

time? 

Ms. PICKLES. Yes. 

28 

Chairman CAMPBELL. For? 

Ms. PICKLES. If we take a slightly wider regional approach, there 

are 21,000 tons of conflict-free tantalum material that has been exported from Congo’s—or, I am sorry, from the Great Lakes region 

since regional—and this just started a few years ago. 

So we are already seeing an increase in the amount of conflictfree material coming out of the region. And I think that will only 

increase from now. 

Chairman CAMPBELL. All right. I will yield back my time, and 

recognize the gentlelady from Wisconsin, Ms. Moore, for 5 minutes. 

Thank you. 

Ms. MOORE. Thank you. I get to be the ranking member. It is not 

often I get to do that. 

Chairman CAMPBELL. Okay. Let me rephrase that—Acting Ranking Member Moore, the gentlelady from Wisconsin, is recognized 

for 5 minutes. 

Ms. MOORE. Thank you so much, Mr. Chairman. I would just 

thank this panel for sticking around for a second round. 

I just wanted to point out that I deliberately chose to be on this 

subcommittee, and much to the surprise of me and my colleagues, 

I turned down a chance to be the Housing Subcommittee, passed 

that over so I could be on this. 

Chairman CAMPBELL. Is it because you are so fond of the chairman? 

Ms. MOORE. It is because I am so fond of the chairman. 

And also so fond of the subject. And I just wanted to point out— 

Mr. Mulvaney is not here—that we do deal with the Bank Secrecy 

Act, the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act, the Iran Sanctions Enabling Act, to deal with Iran nuclear weapons program, the Bank 

Secrecy Act, which deals with suspicious transactions, the Sudan 

Divestment Act. We deal with a lot of international monetary policy. 

So his statement about why is this hearing being conducted in 

this subcommittee, this is one of our areas of jurisdiction. So I just 

wanted to clear that up. 

To the extent that we have American corporations that are dealing in this region, it is one of the reasons that Global Watch and 

others really rely on this committee to make sure that the best 

practices and due diligence and so forth is taken by us, so that our 

monetary policy doesn’t support foreign corruption. 

And so, I am deliberately on this subcommittee for just these 

kinds of hearings, on conflict diamonds, and so forth, and Liberia. 

We have dealt with vulture funds. 

This is your jurisdiction, Mr. Chairman. So don’t let your Members take it away from you. 

I did want to get back to this whole discussion of the artisanal 

workers and some of the choices that they have. 

I have sort of heard the same argument with respect to some 

other sad parts of the history here in America, where it was a bad 

thing to free the slaves because they, then, would have no source 

of income. 

And so, I am wondering, a comment from you, about the real status of these artisanal miners—we have heard conflicting testimony 

here about how much better off they were before Dodd-Frank. 

29 

And I guess, Ms. Pickles, I just want you to have an adequate 

amount of time to tell us what their financial status was before 

Dodd-Frank. 

Ms. PICKLES. I think that one of the positive impacts of this legislation is that it has shone an unprecedented light on exactly that, 

on the inhumane conditions and the terrible working conditions 

that many artisanal miners in Congo have to endure from day to 

day. 

I think if we are looking on a longer term, before Dodd-Frank, 

we are looking at 15 years of conflict that had been funded by minerals in eastern DRC. 

So 15 years of artisanal miners in many of the mines in eastern 

Congo being taxed or inhumanely treated by armed groups who are 

taking the revenues from those mines. 

I don’t think it is a question of saying that Dodd-Frank has had 

a—of course, there have been negative impacts in the sense that 

there have been changes in the way that trade has happened over 

the last few years. 

But now that we are seeing companies starting to source responsibly, that will open up new, conflict-free supply chains in the 

Kivus and provide economic stability for some of those artisanal— 

Ms. MOORE. Is there any future with these workers really having 

some dignity and some transparency with regard to wages and 

hours worked and the kinds of things that we associate with 

human rights in the workplace? 

Ms. PICKLES. I think so. But I think the first thing that we need 

to consider is effectively getting the armed men out of the mines. 

Once the armed men are out of the mines, then we can start to address some of those other problems. Of course, it has been a terrible— 

Ms. MOORE. And if you want to see where the conflict comes in, 

you have to follow the money. And that is why this subcommittee 

is hearing this is because, as you pointed out, Mr. Dizolele, the 

minerals themselves may not be the source of the conflict, but they 

generate a lot of money, and they fund war. Would you disagree 

with that, Mr. Dizolele? 

Mr. DIZOLELE. I will add to it, Congresswoman. There are many 

other sources of funding war in the DRC. The minerals are just an 

element of it. 

An AK–47 in Goma doesn’t cost much. All you have to do is go 

and rob some women who are selling mangos when they are going 

to market, and you will get cash to get an AK–47. 

So this entire idea that the funding that come from mines will 

be the one which will continue to bring the new pipelines of weapons, is a bit overstretched. 

Yes, they funded the big operators, what are called the war entrepreneurs. But the average militia guy, who is 15 or 17 years 

old—and let’s keep that in mind. We are not talking about organized armies here. We are talking about kids. Those are not tapping into the resources. They are living just on $2 like everybody 

else. But they still have the AK–47 or the machete, if I can use the 

example that Mr. Goss used. 

The genocides happen with AK–47s, and they happen with machetes. 

30 

Ms. MOORE. Thank you so much. 

And thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

Chairman CAMPBELL. The gentleman from Michigan, Vice Chairman Huizenga, is recognized for 5 minutes. 

Mr. HUIZENGA. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I appreciate that. 

Mr. Dizolele, I was thinking sort of very similar along the lines 

that you were just discussing. And I am a student of history, I love 

history. 

And I have no doubt, Ms. Pickles, that minerals have a role in 

this conflict, but so do agricultural products. So does the sex trade. 

So do a number of other things that drive economic activity, illicit 

or legal, and certainly we are not even talking about religious or 

ethnic or tribal differences. And it seems to me, we can’t dismiss 

that, and somehow think that Section 1502 solves it. Because it— 

to me, the question isn’t so much are we better off—or were we— 

I think as my friend from Wisconsin said, were we better off before 

Section 1502, and somehow, Section 1502 has made the Congo—the 

DRC—fall apart and go into internal conflict? Pretty clearly, that 

is not the case. 

My question is, are we worse off than what we were? And I think 

that is a subtle difference, but it is a big difference. Because if we 

are worse off, then that means we are going backwards. And I am 

concerned that Section 1502 is putting us in the wrong direction. 

And I am concerned that we will think we have solved the problem 

with Section 1502. In many ways, the West—not just the United 

States, but at some point, maybe the West just sort of washes its 

hands of the issues that really are underlying the conflict because 

we say, ‘‘Wow, we solved it.’’ We have made sure that everybody 

is going to establish some sort of supply chain here. 

And, a trip I have talked about, Mr. Chairman—I am looking forward to visiting the SEC office in Kinshasa. I am sure there must 

be one, because they are now in charge of tracking all of these supply chains. And when we had Mary Jo White here—Chairman 

White here earlier—I am not convinced, and she seemed to indicate, as well, that the SEC is not equipped to do this. 

Ms. Pickles, one of the things that you talked about was that 

part of this drop in exports was caused by a delay of the SEC’s ruling, because that uncertainty caused these folks who need to establish these supply chains—they weren’t sure, so then they just— 

they stopped. 

That may be part of it, but what I am hearing from those endusers is that there is the difficulty of establishing that supply chain 

that is being required of them under Section 1502 and by the SEC. 

That is a huge part of their delay, and that is why they are desperately looking for other sources, and that they are trying to figure out where else in the world marketplace they can go to get 

these essential minerals for their processes and for their products 

without having to deal with this. 

So, I will open it up. We have a minute-and-a-half. I would love 

to hear the conversation from—Ms. Pickles, you can start, and anybody else who cares to comment. 

Ms. PICKLES. Okay, so touching on what was said right there in 

the beginning—yes, of course, we do need to take a holistic view 

of the conflict in Congo, but that doesn’t mean that we shouldn’t 

31 

be sourcing minerals from Congo that are outsourced responsibly, 

and that U.S. companies buying from Congo shouldn’t be so—in 

how they respond to conflict. 

Mr. HUIZENGA. Can I ask you one quick question? 

Ms. PICKLES. Yes. 

Mr. HUIZENGA. Do you have any concern that we may just sort 

of say, ‘‘Okay, we are done. We passed Section 1502. It is now 

being implemented. Whew. Good. That is off the table. Now we can 

walk away?’’ 

Ms. PICKLES. No, I don’t. And I think that there is evidence to 

prove the contrary. I have already talked about some of the closedpipe fighting that is starting up in Congo. And I think—you mentioned before, ‘‘Are we going in the right direction? Are we seeing 

positives?’’ Yes, we are. We have seen a Congolese law that has 

passed that requires everybody in domestic mineral sectors to use 

due diligence. We have seen a similar law passed in Rwanda. We 

have seen traders in Congo now seem to understand what due diligence is, and taking steps to establish the supply chains themselves. And perhaps most importantly for this committee, we have 

seen U.S. companies investing directly in Congo to source responsibly. 

Mr. HUIZENGA. I have one other quick question. Do you believe 

that would have happened at all on its own— 

Ms. PICKLES. No, we have—no. 

Mr. HUIZENGA. —as Mr. Goss seemed to indicate? 

Ms. PICKLES. We have 15 years of proof to show— 

Mr. HUIZENGA. Okay, but you just mentioned Rwanda? 

The law doesn’t cover Rwanda, does it? 

Ms. PICKLES. Yes, Dodd-Frank Section 1502 covers Congo and its 

adjoining countries, so yes, Rwanda is covered. 

Mr. HUIZENGA. So you believe that this is the only solution, 

though, passing Section 1502, and that this would not have happened without that? 

And, Mr. Goss, I don’t know if you care to comment on that? 

Ms. PICKLES. I would just say that the momentum generated by 

Section 1502 and the requirement that it is made on companies to 

source responsibly has changed the dynamic completely—15 years 

of companies sourcing irresponsibly from Congo has been changed 

by this piece of legislation. 

Mr. GOSS. If I may, I would add, I find myself in the middle of 

the conversation here, clearly. The tech industry seems some 

positives from Section 1502 and some distinct challenges with the 

mechanism in Section 1502, but I think the overriding point I am 

trying to make here is that the mineral sourcing, while it is part 

of this, is not going to bring a solution or a resolution to genocide 

in Central Africa, because it is politically based; it is ethnically 

based, et cetera, all the points that we have made before here. 

Yes, our companies in particular—the tech industry in particular 

has tried to remain in the region, and to try to source responsibly, 

and we are at the lead of almost every one of these in-region 

sourcing programs here. The challenge is that they are generating 

minimal amounts of clean material. 

Most other industries are basically saying, if we cannot source 

from the region, we will avoid it, and I think that is a major point 

32 

that the subcommittee needs to look at here, which is, is the mechanism facing in the right direction, or does the mechanism discourage investment? We would certainly like to see a mechanism in 

U.S. law that encourages investment and makes that easier to invest. 

But frankly, no due diligence system is going to work in this 

country without the preconditions of security and stability. We see 

the U.N. Security Council just authorizing in March an intervention brigade to go in and try to neutralize M23, which is being 

funded by Rwanda, which is being provided with military assistance and arms from Rwanda, and potentially from Uganda. 

You have foreign states that are providing arms and assistance 

to these rebel groups. I will repeat my testimony. This is not about 

economics; this is about politics. When you have foreign states, or 

adjoining states who have a stake in the outcome in eastern Congo, 

this is a job for the U.N.; it is a job for the international community. 

I would agree with Ms. Pickles, that yes, minerals and other 

commodities, not just minerals, and the funding associated with 

those, have fueled violence; they have prolonged certain elements 

of this conflict. 

But the conflict is not going to go away just because you take 

away the sourcing for the minerals, because there is a deeper basis 

for it than that. 

Thank you. 

Chairman CAMPBELL. Thank you. And our clean-up hitter for 

today will be the gentleman from Indiana, Mr. Stutzman. You are 

recognized for 5 minutes. 

Mr. STUTZMAN. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

My question is, are there other countries that are buying minerals out of the Congo? 

Ms. Pickles, do you know? 

Ms. PICKLES. Yes, I know it has happened. 

When you say other countries, you mean other than the United 

States? 

Mr. STUTZMAN. Correct, yes. 

Ms. PICKLES. Yes, there has always been a broad market base for 

minerals from Congo. 

Mr. STUTZMAN. Do they have a rule similar to Section 1502? 

Ms. PICKLES. Section 1502 is a forerunner, so the American Government is the first to produce a piece of legislation like this. 

Mr. STUTZMAN. But to me, as I listen to the situation here, reading what has to happen if a company can’t verify that the minerals 

they use did not originate in the DRC, Section 1502 requires them 

to: one, exercise due diligence on the source and chain of custody 

of these minerals; two, to hire an independent third party to audit 

the due diligence measures; and three, to report to the SEC on the 

due diligence measures they undertook. 

This is all responsibility for a company in the third district in Indiana. Is that correct, am I understanding that—right, Mr. Goss? 

Some people may pat themselves on the back and say, well, we 

are making sure that we are not using their resources or their minerals, but we are only hurting the people of the Congo, because if 

we walk away, who else is going to take the same sort of initiative 

33 

and use the same integrity that Americans should and we expect 

to use in the Congo. Are the Chinese the same sort of standard? 

Are they going to operate with the same sort of integrity with 

which we expect Americans to operate? 

Ms. PICKLES. Is that for me? 

Mr. STUTZMAN. For anyone. 

Ms. PICKLES. I think the first thing I would say is that U.S. companies are not walking away from Congo. I mentioned in my testimony in the beginning that— 

Mr. STUTZMAN. But this will make it harder for them, correct? 

Ms. PICKLES. It doesn’t make it harder for them; it means that 

they have to source minerals in a responsible way. So, some U.S. 

companies who weren’t buying from Congo before are now sourcing 

there, which demonstrates that— 

Mr. STUTZMAN. Do we know, are there any companies that have 

walked away from the Congo since Section 1502? 

Ms. PICKLES. Also, as I said earlier, there has been uncertainty 

because some companies didn’t know what the final rule was going 

to say and were waiting to make sourcing decisions based on that. 

Mr. STUTZMAN. I just think that if we want to help make a difference in the Congo, the best thing to do is to be involved economically and to share our best practices, to share the system that we 

operate under with people there rather than really restricting our 

own selves and tying our own hands. 

Mr. Aronson, I have a question. 

Some Section 1502 advocates compare the conflict minerals campaign by civil society to the South Africa divestment campaign in 

the 1980s. Is that an appropriate comparison, in your opinion? 

Mr. ARONSON. Thank you very much for that question, Congressman. 

I think that is an important comparison because it is one that 

the advocates themselves often cite. They say, well, look we have— 

yes, there are temporary economic impacts, negative impacts, but 

just as the South Africa divestment campaign had temporary costs 

on many black South Africans, but ultimately proved worthwhile, 

so this campaign will ultimately prove to be worthwhile because it 

will help end the conflicts. 

First, it is not helping end the conflicts, and second, I think that 

we have to look at some of the key differences. For one thing, in 

South Africa you had South African leaders calling for the divestment campaign. There was no similar call from Congolese society 

for a embargo that has happened. 

Second, the divestment campaign targeted the right people. It 

targeted the aging South African white elite. In this case, it is targeting African warlords who really don’t care what Western leaders 

or Western audiences think of them. 

And, finally, there was a clear mechanism in place for change in 

South Africa; you pitted the political elite versus the business elite 

which wanted to end the international isolation and get back to 

making money. 

In the case of Section 1502, what we have done is sideline legitimate businesses. So we have inadvertently, but predictably, put 

money and power into the hands of warlords and armed groups in 

34 

eastern Congo including the Congolese army, which is often highly 

predatory. 

Mr. STUTZMAN. I appreciate your answer, because that is my 

fear, Mr. Chairman, that we really are keeping the businesses that 

would operate appropriately out of the business. At some point, we 

are going to continue to pile on more and more regulations trying 

to fix a problem that is very difficult to fix and really just engaging 

ourselves. 

Chairman CAMPBELL. Thank you, and I would like to thank each 

of our witnesses for their testimony today and for your indulgence 

with our recess during votes. 

The Chair notes that some Members may have additional questions for this panel, which they may wish to submit in writing. 

Without objection, the hearing record will remain open for 5 legislative days for Members to submit written questions to these witnesses and to place their responses in the record. Also, without objection, Members will have 5 legislative days to submit extraneous 

materials to the Chair for inclusion in the record. 

And without objection, this hearing is now adjourned. 

[Whereupon, at 4:25 p.m., the hearing was adjourned.] 

(35) 

A P P E N D I X 

May 21, 2013 

36 


81758.001

Congressman Jim McDermott 

Submission for the Record 

House Financial Services Hearing on Section 1502 of Dodd-Frank 

May 21, 2013 

Thank you, Mr. Chairman, for allowing me to submit this statement for the record - I regret that those 

members who are not on the Financial Services Committee, yet played a substantial role in writing this 

legislation, were not allowed to participate in the hearing. I believe it's a new precedent for the Financial 

Services Committee and I do not think it is a healthy one for the Congress. 

I appreciate the witnesses' testimonies, and with my own experience in sub-Saharan Africa, I think we 

can all agree on how important what we are discussing today is. It is frustrating that we have let these 

conditions in Central Africa go on so long, but I am very encouraged by the amount of progress on the 

ground since 1502 passed. 

International companies and foreign governments have ravaged Central Africa and the Congo, stripping it 

of its natural resources, for hundreds of years. In the 1880s the Belgians took this to a whole new horrific 

level, and other countries and international conglomerates joined in with no regard for the environment, 

security, or health ofthe people they were exploiting. 

Few areas have the history of suffering and violence that can match Central Africa's. In other parts of the 

world where there is natural resource exploitation, we have seen corporations and the international 

community take at least some action. That can't be said here. Until this law passed, Central Africa was 

the site ofthe largest and most unstable natural resource black market in the world, and the sight of the 

world's largest ongoing war, and we had done nothing to stop it. 

It is amazing that we took so long to act. Before this bill, we spent years hoping companies would do the 

right thing on their own, and despite repeated appeals they simply would not. But just a few weeks ago, at 

the Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development conference in Paris, it was almost 

unanimously agreed upon by companies, NGOs, Central African countries, and OECD members, 

including the u.S. State Department and much of the European Union, that there has been enormous 

progress, and that this law made the difference. 

There are, of course, naysayers, and this law will not solve Central Africa's peace and stability problems. 

But it has changed behaviors and jump-started some good governance that is spreading. Transparency and 

responsible sourcing is an essential part of solving Central Africa's governance issues. 

The United States and this committee have an obligation to take seriously the threat that foreign black 

markets pose. Companies around the world rely on this huge, unstable black market to manufacture their 

products with prices and supplies always in question. It is bad for companies and capital formation, 

investors and investor confidence, and consumers. 

Progress has not come in a perfectly wrapped gift box, but the aim of this law was not to replace every 

single job within a corrupt system. That is not a realistic goal. Mr. Aronson's testimony seems to argue 

that we should keep the black market because innocent people benefit from it. In the face of the human 

catastrophe that this black market has fueled, I have to disagree. Funding widespread violence and slave 

labor is not an option, even if it provides jobs for others. We need to move faster, not go back to what we 

know does not work. 
37 


81758.002

The misinformation out there is plentiful. What has delayed progress is the foot-dragging by a group of 

companies that just do not like regulation, not the poor design of the law. What is unusual is not the law, 

but the fact that we let this go on for so long. 

In a lot of ways this hearing is odd in that it flies in the face of the big progress that is happening on the 

ground. We are seeing organizations opening multiple conflict-free mines at a time in order to employ the 

influx of workers. Conflict-free mining works, it is spreading quickly, and where it is in place, the 

situation has remained peaceful and stable. Other industries are jumping on board. The Diamond industry 

has seen this progress and is working on its own due diligence framework. 

We always knew this law would take years to implement and to serve as a widespread model. That 

transition is one we knew would have some costs and a lot of benefits. Implementation has only just 

started and I am encouraged by all of the good work and progress so far. Now is the time to raise our 

expectations, not lower them. 

2 
38 


81758.003

Opening Statement 

Of 

Representative Gwen Moore 

The Unintended Consequences of Dodd-Frank 's Conflict Mineral Provision 

May 21, 2013 

Thank you to the Chairman and Ranking Member for holding this hearing. 

I want to thank the witnesses for taking the time to come here today to share your 

perspectives on Section 1502 of Dodd-Frank. 

The Congo suffers from the "paradox of plenty," or what economists sometimes 

call the "resource curse." In the case of the Congo, it has been especially bloody 

and destabilizing. 

Section 1502 of Dodd-Frank is a provision, however limited, aimed at severing the 

link between resources and conflict in the Democrat Republic of the Congo. 

After the floor debate on the SEC "cost-benefit" bill last week, I am disappointed 

that none of the trade groups challenging Section 1502 in court based on "costbenefit" projections can be here today, as I would like to hear how they calculated 

the dollar value of the human suffering associated with keeping the black market 

alive in these minerals that fuels the bloody war. 

I have not seen that number cited in the various studies. 

I would have benefited from their perspective on that point, especially as I hear 

from other companies that they are complying and from the United Nations that the 

provision is having a positive impact on the country. 

Furthermore, I understand that a group of high school sophomores had success 

showing reasonable country of origin inquire per Section 1502. 

Prior to passage of Dodd-Frank, we knew that these minerals were funding the 

horrors of the ongoing conflict, so we acted. 

According the United Nations Group of Experts, we also know that the provision is 

leading to a reduction in violence associated with the conflict and promoting good 

mining practices. 
39 


81758.004

We know that companies are complying. 

In fact, the VP ofKemet, the largest user of tantalum in the world and who is 

compliant with 1502, met with me in my office to make it perfectly clear that 

compliance is possible and happening. 

In other words, Section 1502 is working. 

It may not be a panacea to cure all that ills the Congo. Rather it is limited, marketbased approach to begin to address the funding source fueling the conflict. 

There may be some dislocation associated with the transition from a black market 

to a conflict free sourced market, but those impacts, I have to believe are better 

than slavery and death. 

The SEC has issued a rule and companies are complying. The situation related to 

these minerals funding violence is improving. The benefits to the provision are 

playing out in real time in the Congo. 

Nonetheless, I would be willing to work with anyone that has ideas for improving 

the provision to make it even more effective in breaking the cycle of violence 

associated with mineral funded war and devastation in the Congo, but I am not 

interested in going back to the status quo of black market materials funding 

violence, instability, and war. 

Thank you again and I look forward to hearing from our witnesses. 
40 


81758.005

David Aronson 

Testimony before the United States House of Representatives 

Committee on Financial Services, Monetary Policy and Trade Subcommittee 

"The Unintended Consequences of Dodd-Frank's Conflict Minerals Provision" 

May 21, 2013 

It is the sense of Congress that the exploitation and trade of conflict minerals originating in the 

Democratic Republic of the Congo is helping to finance conflict characterized by extreme levels of 

violence in the eastern Democratic Republic of the Congo, particularly sexual- and gender-based 

violence, and contributing to an emergency humanitarian situation therein, warranting the provisions of 

section 13(p) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as added by subsection (b). 

-Dodd-Frank Act Section 1502, Paragraph "A" 

"Pour nous, sans nous, c'est c~ntre nous,lI 

-Traditional Congolese saying 

Thank you, Chainnan John Campbell, Ranking Member Wm. Lacy Clay, and Members of the 

Subcommittee, for holding this hearing on the unintended impacts of Dodd Frank's conflict 

minerals provision. My name is David Aronson. I am a freelance writer and editor who has lived 

and worked off and on in central Africa for 25 years. I have written about the Congo for The New 

York Times, the Washington Post, The New Republic, Dissent, the Chicago Tribune, the 

Christian Science Monitor, the World Policy Journal, and elsewhere. My blog, 

www.CongoResources.org, receives some 15,000 unique visitors a month. 

Dodd Frank 1502, the "conflict minerals" provision of the 2010 Dodd-Frank Wall Street Refonn 

and Consumer Protection Act (DF-lS02), is a case study in how good intentions can go awry, 

particularly when a compelling activist-sponsored narrative substitutes for considered and timely 

analysis. As I will make clear: 

• Advocates for the law disregarded the consensus opinion of Congolese experts who 

repeatedly warned them of the dangers the campaign posed to their people; 

• The law imposed a de facto embargo on mineral production that impoverished the 

region's million or so artisanal miners; it also drove the trade into the hands of militia and 

predatory Congolese anny units; 

• The military situation on-the-ground has considerably worsened since passage of the law 

and the SEC's promulgation of the implementation guidelines; 

• The case for DF-1502 rested on dubious and misleading assumptions; 
41 


81758.006

• A dozen or so scholars and NGOs have independently studied this issue; they have all 

concluded that the law is imposing unacceptable costs on the Congolese while doing little 

to diminish the violence. 

Background 

Since the late 1990s, protracted civil conflicts in the Democratic Republic of Congo have led to 

an economic collapse, massive population displacements, deepening poverty, and a chronic state 

offood insecurity. It is hard to exaggerate the scale of the humanitarian catastrophe that has 

engulfed the country. Here are a few data points: 

The International Rescue Committee's detailed, geographically randomized population 

survey of 2007 estimated that 5.4 million people had died as a result of the wars and that 

the country was continuing to experience some 45,000 excess deaths per month. Even if 

the actual numbers are just half of what the IRC estimates, this would still make the 

conflict in eastern Congo the deadliest since World War II. 

• In the latest UNDP report, the Congo placed I 87th out of 187 countries on its ranking of 

human development indicators, behind Afghanistan, Niger and Burundi. The country 

stands at the bottom of the International Food Policy Research Institute's Global Hunger 

Index. And earlier this month, Save the Children announced that Congo had displaced 

Niger as the world's worst place to be a mother. Niger is a desert; the Congo, properly 

managed, could be a breadbasket to the continent. 

• Some 88 percent of Congolese live below the absolute poverty line of $1.25 per day; 

about 70 percent lack access to adequate food; and one in four children is severely 

malnourished. About 2.7 million Congolese are internally displaced, third most in the 

world. 

Given the scale of this disaster, it is entirely creditable that activists in this country and abroad 

felt an obligation to respond. Their mission, to educate Western audiences about the suffering of 

distant people and enlist them in efforts to remedy that suffering, is part of an inspiring tradition 

that began with the 19th century abolition movement, continued through the international 

campaign against Red Rubber at the start of the 20th century, and persists in some oftoday's 

most distinguished human rights campaigns. It is a tradition I strongly identify with. 

Unfortunately, in their quest to fashion a narrative that would resonate with and therefore 

galvanize their largely Western audience, activists ignored the complexities of the local 

context and brushed aside Congolese experts who repeatedly warned them of the dangers 

the conflict minerals campaign posed to their people. In doing so, they developed policy 

prescriptions that damaged an already tenuous economy, entrenched the position of the 

warlords, and accomplished little by way of resolving the conflicts. 
42 


81758.007

Disregard of Local Experts 

In aNew York Times opinion editoriall wrote about DF-lS02, I reported that knowledgeable 

Congolese felt excluded from the conflict minerals debate. It was, they told me, a dialog in 

which their voices went unheeded, dominated by Western advocacy groups confronting Western 

electronics companies. As a result, immensely important decisions about the lives of millions of 

Congolese were made without any input from them. 

It happens that an organization with impeccable credentials for supporting the rights of workers 

in Third World countries wrote a contemporaneous paper about this very topic. The organization 

describes itself this way: "MakeITFair is a European project focusing on the electronics industry, 

especially on consumer electronics like mobile phones, laptops and MP3 players. We want to let 

young people across Europe know about the labour abuses and environmental problems that are 

going on right now around the world - just to satisfy our demand for all the latest electronic 

gadgets." In an October 2010 report, they wrote the following: 

The makelTfair project, however, deplores the lack of communication with local 

stakeholders when formulating what should be done .... 'When high level institutions and 

industry are busy drawing up standards, local views and priorities are in danger of 

remaining unheard .... Despite the fact that all such initiatives aim to end the mineral trade 

funding armed groups in Eastern ORe, there is growing concern that there is a boycott in 

practice on minerals from Eastern ORe, which may lead to worse consequences for the 

people on ground .... During interviews in Goma and Bukavu in May 2010, IPIS 

encountered very few representatives of civil society groups who were in favour of an 

embargo on minerals from Eastern ORe. By far most informants questioned the 

usefulness of an embargo. 1 

Negative Unintended Consequences 

The Dodd-Frank Financial Reform Act was signed into law on July 22, 2010; on August 22, 

2012, after several postponements to allow for further public debate and fact finding, the 

Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) promulgated a detailed set of implementation 

regulations. What has happened in Congo as a result? 

In early 2011, in response to negative publicity from activist groups and in anticipation ofthe 

eventual implementation ofDF-IS02, the Electronics Industry Citizenship Coalition (EICC)-

which includes most large US electronics companies-advised the Malaysia Smelting 

Corporation, the last remaining smelter processing minerals from eastern Congo, to stop 

accepting minerals from central Africa that were not certifiably clean. The resulting de facto 

embargo of Congolese minerals went into effect on April I, 2011 and had an immediate impact 

on the artisanal mining sector and on the broader economy of the region. 

1 Voices from the Inside: Local Views on Mining Reform in Eastern DR Congo, Finnwatch and Swedwatch, October 

2010. http://makeitfair.org/en/the-facts/news/local-voices-must-be-heard 
43 


81758.008

To understand the extent of that impact, consider this open letter from 50 South Kivu civil 

society organizations dated July 5, 2011, and addressed to President Obama and SEC chair Mary 

Schapiro: 

In this environment, artisanal mining has emerged as one of our only economic lifelines, 

and has directly and indirectly provided millions of jobs. The abrupt cessation of this trade 

has had devastating impacts on our people: 

1. Millions of our artisanal miners have suddenly had their livelihood cut from under them. 

They find it increasingly difficult to pay school, health, or maternity fees; some even 

report having difficulty providing food for their families. 

2. Mining enclaves have emerged over the past decade in places so remote that only 

planes can access them. The world's sudden refusal to buy these minerals means the 

planes no longer service these communities; with nothing to trade, they are unable to 

provide themselves with such basic necessities as salt, sugar, oil, cloths, soap and so on. 

3. Because artisinal mining was one of our only engines of economic growth, secondary 

economic impacts are being felt throughout the province. Even in our large towns, 

economic activity has diminished; construction slowed; trade in everything fallen. People 

with very little to begin with are now doing with less. 2 

I would add one more reason for concern: near epidemic-levels of livestock and crop diseases are 

currently devastating agricultural production. Families who dispersed their risk by sending some 

members to mine while keeping others at home to farm are being hit on both counts; they have 

nothing else to fall back on. 

Today, the de facto embargo on Congo's tin, tantalum and tungsten (the three Ts) is still in effect, 

and DF-1502 continues to depress the economy of eastern Congo. There has been some 

resumption in the trade, from three sources: 

• Several "conflict-free" initiatives are underway, with mixed results. The Dutch are 

funding a project in Nyabibwe that has produced a few hundred tons of product; local 

CSOs hope to expand the project to five nearby mining sites. However, there are 

allegations that the site, widely viewed as a test case for responsible sourcing, is already 

being exploited by a military-led smuggling racket. 

• Despite the central government's suspension of a couple of Chinese trading houses from 

the mineral trade in May 2012, Chinese firms continue to buy some modest amount of 

undocumented minerals at significantly discounted prices. 

• Finally, there has been a significant expansion in illicit trade through Rwanda, with 

cassiterite in particular being smuggled across Lake Kivu and repackaged as domestic 

Rwandan product. The fact that Rwanda is one of the unintended beneficiaries of the 

, Open Letter to President Barack Obama And SEC Chair Mary Schapiro From Religious, Civil Society and Business 

Leaders In South Kivu Province, Democratic Republic Of Congo, July 5, 2011. http://www.sec.gov/comments/s7-

40-10!s74010-324.pdf 
44 


81758.009

legislation is a bitter pill for many Congolese, who point out that Rwanda has been 

plundering Congolese mineral wealth for years. 

Overall, however, the trade has by no means reached its pre-embargo level, and miners receive 

significantly less than they used to for each kilogram of mineral that they produce. (Untagged 

cassiterite sells for $3-4 per kilo, in contrast to $9-10 per kilo for the tagged product. Miners 

were receiving $13-15 per kilo prior to the embargo.) 

In contrast to the three Ts, the trade in gold continues unabated, with virtually no procedures in 

place to formalize let alone control it. As my fellow panelist, Sophia Pickles from Global 

Witness recently documented, up to 10 tonnes of gold from South Kivu are being laundered each 

year through Burundi and exported to Dubai--with an "almost complete absence of checks." In 

North Kivu, a significant portion of the gold trade is controlled by the Congolese army 

commanders, including ex -General Gabriel Amisi, who was fired as chief of staff last year after 

it was revealed he had been selling weapons to militia groups. Last month, the Wall Street 

Journal reported that "opportunities for illicit gains only increased after the U.S. in 20 I 0 passed 

a Wall Street overhaul, known as Dodd-Frank." While a number of efforts are underway to 

establish "conflict-free" gold supply chains for boutique jewelers, gold is so valuable, so easy to 

smuggle, and so fungible that it is hard to imagine how the trade could be brought under control. 

I would respectfully submit that preventing Congolese warlords from selling gold to Middle East 

or South Asian traders in one of the most ungoverned areas of the world is not a feasible policy 

goal. 

A Plethora ofInitiatives 

As the Pole Institute has documented, the number of different international initiatives to deal 

with Congolese minerals is astounding-and increasingly problematic: "It has become 

increasingly clear that the parallel development of a range of different international standards, 

which in the end all have to be applied by the same actors, is a problem ... The multiplication of 

uncoordinated visits for many different purposes are generally regarded by economic operators 

on the ground as auditing activities with related increase of audit fatigue. Participants warned 

against the increase in 'conflict minerals tourism' that fails to deliver concrete results.,,3 

The Violence in Congo Has only Gotten Worse 

The economic harm caused by DF-J502 might be worthwhile if the embargo were having its 

intended effect, of reducing the overall level of violence in the region. Advocates used to argue 

that the legislation was not having its intended effects because the SEC had yet to issue the 

implementing regulations. Now that it has, it is important to ask whether we are seeing an 

improvement on the ground. 

'Dominic Johnson, Senior Analyst, NO KIVU, NO CONFLICT? The misguided struggle against "conflict minerals" in 

the ORe. The Pole Institute, April 2013. 
45 


81758.010

Roger Meece, the UN special representative in Congo and Monusco chief, drew a dire picture in 

a briefing before the Security Council. Appealing for an additional military brigade, he told the 

Council that an "ever-growing number of violent, destructive rebel groups is battling for territory 

while terrorizing local populations." Other groups have echoed Meese's assessment. Just last 

week, the International Red Cross reported that violence in eastern Congo had reached 

"unprecedented levels." This is not the result we were led to expect. 

The Case for Conflict Minerals Rested on Dubious Assumptions 

To be fair, it is difficult to disaggregate the impact of the conflict mineral law from other 

developments in the region. It could be that the situation would be even worse if the legislation 

hadn't passed. We have to examine whether the advocates' reasons for expecting the law to 

reduce violence stand up to sustained analysis. Here is how the Enough Project made the case for 

conflict minerals legislation in April 2009: 

The time has come to expose a sinister reality: Our insatiable demand for electronics 

products such as cell phones and laptops is helping fuel waves of sexual violence in a 

place that most of us will never go, affecting people most of us will never meet. The 

Democratic Republic of the Congo is the scene of the deadliest conflict globally since 

World War II. There are few other conflicts in the world where the link between our 

consumer appetites and mass human suffering is so direct' 

As several scholars have noted, this analysis fails on several counts: 

1) It misdiagnoses the nature of the conflicts in eastern Congo. For example, the rebel movement 

that is of greatest concern at the moment, the M23, does not control any mines, has not attempted 

to do so, and does not seek to control mineral transport in the regions it does govern. 

2) It diverts attention from other much-needed po licy actions in the field, such as resolving land 

conflict, promoting inter-community reconciliation, jump-starting economic development, and 

fighting corruption. 

3) It does not take into account the enabling context. Even if minerals were as central to the 

conflict as advocates claimed, attempts to impose a regulatory regime are unlikely to succeed 

given the institutional weakness of Congo's central government. 

4) It ignores the fact that there are numerous other opportunities for violence entrepreneurs to 

make money, from taxing transport routes to robbing banks. 

5) It increases the likelihood of conflict by depriving young men of nonviolent livelihood 

alternatives and by exacerbating competition between local stakeholders over ever-scarcer 

resources. 

4 The Enough Project: "Can You Hear Congo Now? Cell Phones, Conflict Minerals, and the Worst Sexual Violence in 

the World," April 1, 2009. http://www.enoughproject.orgfnews/strategy-paper-can-you-hear-congo-now-cell· 

phones·conflict-minerals·and·worst·sexual·violence·w 
46 


81758.011

Experts all but Unanimously View the Campaign as a Failure 

Over the past eighteen months, a dozen independent scholars and NGOs have published reports 

on the impact of the conflict minerals campaign. Strikingly, they have all reached similar 

conclusions: DF-1502 is harming ordinary people, helping militia and warlords, and in no way 

significantly reducing conflict. Here is some of what these scholars and activists have had to say: 

Laura Seay, assistant professor at Morehouse College, for the Center for Global Development: 

"Nicknamed "Obama's Law" by the Congolese, section 1502 has created a de facto ban on 

Congolese mineral exports, put anywhere from tens of thousands up to 2 million Congolese 

miners out of work in the eastern Congo, and, despite ending most of the trade in Congolese 

conflict minerals, done little to improve the security situation or the daily lives of most 

Congolese."s 

Raymond Gilpin, director of the US Institute of Peace Center for Sustainable Economies (CSE): 

"Though well-intentioned, [DF-1502] fails to address the root causes of conflict and grossly 

underestimates the resilience and adaptability of the warring factions. In recent months the armed 

groups have proven that they can quickly adapt, shifting from conflict mining to smuggling, 

racketeering (including 'taxes' imposed on coal and cattle) and bank robbery.,,6 

Severinne Autesserre, assistant professor at Colombia University, for the peer-reviewed Journal 

of African Studies: 

"The well-meaning international efforts have also had unintended ramifications that have 

prevented the intervention from achieving its stated goals, and that have even, at times, 

contributed to the deterioration of the situation in eastern Congo .... Because of these exclusive 

focuses, the international efforts have exacerbated the problems that they aimed to combat.,,7 

Enrico Carisch and Dr Claude Kabemba, of the Open Society's South Africa Initiative: 

"But the reality on the ground could not be more different from the concept that every conflict in 

eastern Congo is - at its heart - a fight for control over the country's vast natural resources. This 

certainly does not appear to be the case with the current conflict. 

In fact. .. the hundreds of thousands of artisanal gold miners in four provinces (North Kivu, 

South Kivu, Oriental and Maniema) are no longer afraid of warlords or militias. Instead, they 

fear the hordes of corrupt civil servants, bureaucrats and members of the government's security 

forces, who are far more interested in exploiting the miners rather than supporting and protecting 

them ... 

5 Laura Seay, What's Wrong with Dodd-Frank 15021 Conflict Minerals, Civilian Livelihoods, and the Unintended 

Consequences of Western Advocacy. Center for Global Oevelopment, Working Paper 284, January 2012 

6 Raymond Gilpin and Brett Boor, On the Issues: Instability in the DR Congo. US Institute of Peace, August 2012 

7 Severinne Autesserre, Dangerous Tales: Dominant Narratives and their Unintended Consequences. African Affairs, 

Oxford University Press, February 2012 
47 


81758.012

The current conflict is not about minerals. It is about Congo's dreadful governance - and the 

bloody role of neighbouring governments."g 

Dominic Johnson, a senior analyst for the Goma-based Pole Institute: 

"A pattern is emerging in which Kivu's mining sector is being asphyxiated in the name of reform. 

Before 2010, Kivu's mineral traders had willingly participated in moves to strengthen formal and 

legal channels and to safeguard Kivu livelihoods by creating "conflict-free" production and 

trading chains within Eastern Congo. The mining ban killed this off ... ,,9 

To my knowledge, not a single independent analysis has concluded that Dodd-Frank 1502 

has had a positive impact on developments in eastern Congo. 

Listen to Congolese 

Finally, I would ask the subcommittee to listen to the voices of Congolese who have been 

affected most directly by the law: 

Serge Mulumba, president of the mining cooperative CDMC, in a letter to the SEC: 

"We cannot give you exactly the number oflives that are lost each day following the cessation 

of artisanal mining in the DRC and yet even if a child died or who is hungry or do not go to 

school because his father digger lacked money, this is a tragedy, it is a sad news that should 

challenge our humanity.'010 

Pastor Raymond Muhombo Shemihiyo, in an open letter posted on Fair Jewelry Auction: 

"Please listen attentively to our cries of weeping and anguish. Our families and us will be 

doomed to death if you do not hear these cries of alarm. Do not wait to rescue us when we will 

be already in the grave. Act in time to avoid the humanitarian catastrophe that would arise from 

the consequences of your suspension to purchase our minerals. "II 

The heads of three South Kivu mining associations, in a letter to Intel, begged the EICC to 

reconsider DF-1502: 

"What is the refuge of all the Congolese jobless, around 85 % of the population. Is it to make 

peace or to trouble the peace, when the life is stopped for a population? No job, no life. Please 

imagine the consequences ... ,,12 

8 Enrico Carisch and Dr Claude Kabemba, Congo-Kinshasa:Conflict Minerals Not Fueling M23 Rebellion 

Open Society Initiative for Southern Africa (Johannesburg), 27 November 2012 

9 Dominic Johnson, Senior Analyst, NO KIVU, NO CONFLICT? The misguided struggle against "conflict minerals" in 

the ORe. The Pole Institute, April 2013 

10 Mulumba K. Serge, President of CDMC Mining Cooperative in DRC/KATANGA, October 17,2011 

11 SOS From The Small Scale Miners of the Congo Regarding The Dodd Frank Act, A letter from Pastor Raymond 

Muhombo Shemihiyo, General Mining Cooperatives of North Kivu, Democratic Republic of the Congo. 

12 letter to Dr Jerry Meyers, Chair of Extractives work group Intel, from Mukulumanya W. Josue President of the 

Gecomiski, and Raymond Muhombo Shemihiyo President 
48 


81758.013

Father Didier de Failly sj., in a letter to the SEC: 

"Now if the Dodd-Frank regulations are applied from April this year it will ruin all these efforts 

and condemn hundreds of thousands of people in Eastern DRC to keep under the terror ofthese 

maffiosi barons, instead of improving the whole situation. Even in Rwanda, Uganda and Burundi, 

thousands of people will be badly affected." 13 

"For us, without us, is against us" 

Chairman John Campbell, Ranking Member Wm. Lacy Clay, and Members of the Subcommittee, 

I began my testimony by lauding the tradition of international citizen activism represented by 

groups like Enough and Global Witness, who at their best continue a centuries' old tradition of 

global conscience. One of that tradition's signal achievements was the peaceful overthrow of 

South Africa's apartheid regime. Defenders ofthe conflict minerals campaign sometimes 

suggest that it resembles the divestment campaign of the 1980s. Just as divestment imposed real, 

tangible costs on the South African economy but ultimately proved worth the price, so, they say, 

the conflict minerals campaign will eventually prove to have been worth the temporary economic 

dislocations it has caused. 

I agree that the comparison to the divestment campaign is instructive. But it is not the similarities 

of the campaigns that strike me so much their differences. For one, the anti-apartheid activists 

were acting in solidarity with South Africa's moral and political leaders. Nelson Mandela and 

Archbishop Desmond Tutu urged Western countries to divest from South Africa. In calling for 

their universities and companies to divest, Western activists were following the lead of South 

Africans rather than fashioning a solution of their own. In the case of conflict minerals, by 

contrast, the activists consistently brushed aside the concerns of informed local leaders. Second, 

the divestment campaign targeted the right people with the right incentives: The leaders of 

apartheid South Africa saw themselves as representatives of European civilization. They could 

therefore be shamed by a Western-led campaign aimed at stigmatizing them. By contrast, the 

horizons of Mai Mai Sheka or Mutomboki are entirely local. It is safe to say that they do not care 

what Western starlets think of them. Final\y, the divestment campaign was based on a clear 

theory of change: It pitted ageing pro-apartheid politicians against South Africa's business elite, 

who wanted an end to international isolation so they could go back to making money. With 

conflict minerals, just the opposite is true: By sidelining legitimate business interests, DF-1502 

inadvertently-but predictably-put money and power into the hands of the worst elements on 

the ground, with the negative consequences we continue to see. 

13 Father Didier de Failly, Note on The Need To let Some Time To Implement A Thorough Control System On 

Artisanal Mining In Eastern DRC, 3/1012011. http://www.sec.gov/comments/s7-40-10/s74010-190.pdf 
49 


81758.014

The Unintended Consequences of Dodd-Frank's Conflict Minerals Provision 

The United States House of Representatives 

Committee on Financial Services 

Subcommittee on Monetary Policy and Trade 

Testimony by Mvemba Phezo Dizolele 

Visiting Fellow, Hoover Institution on War, Revolution and Peace 

Tuesday, May 20, 2013 

Chairman Campbell, Ranking Member Clay and Distinguished Members 

of the Subcommittee on Monetary Policy and Trade: 

Thank you for the invitation and honor to testify before your subcommittee 

today. A little over a year ago, I had the privilege, along with other 

colleagues, to share with members of this subcommittee my perspective 

and insight about Section 1502 of the Dodd-Frank Act and its consequences 

for the people of the Democratic Republic of Congo. 

I would like to note, however, that the views expressed in this statement 

are mine, and mine alone. 

A year is enough time for emotions to cool off and reason and honesty to 

prevail as we monitor and evaluate Dodd-Frank Section 1502. It is then 

quite appropriate for us to look at the unintended consequences of this 

legislation with the informed vantage point of time. 

A week ago I returned from a working trip to the Democratic Republic of 

Congo where I participated in a conference about the Peace, Security and 

Cooperation Framework for the Democratic Republic of the Congo and the 

1 
50 


81758.015

so-called Conflict Minerals. The Conference brought together Congolese 

academics, political leaders and representatives of civil society 

organizations in a memorable moment of reflection about ways and means 

to usher lasting peace in Congo and end the illicit and illegal trade and 

looting of natural resources. 

Throughout the conference and my stay in Kinshasa, I could not help but 

marvel, as I have done many times before, at the determination and 

commitment of our friends who promoted Section 1502. I know that they 

mobilized thousands of people in a campaign that raised awareness on the 

continued conflict in eastern Congo. This high level zeal is the campaign's 

main strength. 

Section 1502 seeks to bring peace to eastern Congo by regulating mineral 

trade through U.S. law, cleaning up the supply chain and reducing militias' 

access to financial means. The spirit of this law supposes that such a 

regulation would de facto curb the violence and human rights abuses. 

This campaign, however, has a serious weakness. Proponents of 1502 built 

their case on an erroneous premise that claimed that minerals were either 

the source or at the center of the conflict. Cutting militias' access to mines 

will lead to peace, the argument goes. 

Let me suggest then that the best way to evaluate the consequences of 

Section 1502 would be to look at its premise, claims and impact on 

institution-building and on the Congolese people. 

Mineral trade in eastern Congo is part of a wider war economy, which can 

only be regulated either by the most powerful armed groups working in 

collusion, the biggest armed group imposing its way on the smaller ones or 

by their backers seeking to maximize profits and preserve their own 

interests. As such, Section 1502 builds on a weak foundation and requires 

the buy-in of the very negative actors it seeks to tame. This approach 

2 
51 


81758.016

perverts basic peacemaking models and rewards criminals and would-be 

spoilers. 

This premise led to a law with the following results: 

1. The U.S. Congress passed a legislation that ignores the will and 

agency of the Congolese people and imposes an outside solution 

to a problem that is best understood by the Congolese. This 

approach to peacemaking undermines DRC's strong civil society, 

which has been working hard over the years to end the looting of 

natural resources, including the audit of mining contracts, the 

revision of the mining code, the call for security sector reform and 

the respect of a transparent and credible electoral process. 

2. The U.s. Securities and Exchange Commission, which is entrusted 

with the implementation of this law, is not qualified to carry out 

such a task The SEC has neither the expertise nor the money to 

conduct a cost and benefit analysis of the impact of Section 1502 

on the Congolese and u.s. business. Thus, the SEC had to decide 

on such a complicated matter affecting the livelihood of millions 

of people without adequate assessment of the situation on the 

ground in Congo. It was inappropriate to ask the SEC to serve as 

the primary agency to enforce this law. This work is simply 

outside this agency's scope and mandate. 

3. Section 1502 perpetrates the dominant, but wrong narrative that 

casts the Congolese people as incapable of solving their problems 

and in constant need for outside guidance. The truth is that no 

one understands mining in Congo better than the Congolese. By 

failing to engage the Congolese in an honest dialogue on the 

relationship between conflict and mining, proponents of Section 

1502 failed to spur a national ownership of the initiative through 

a true partnership with the Congolese. 

3 
52 


81758.017

4. Section 1502 creates what is known as "Congo fatigue". Staffers in 

both chambers of Congress work hard to help steer U.S. Congo 

policy in the direction that best benefits the Congolese people. 

House members and senators invest their political capital to do 

the same. It is therefore disappointing to hear that the legislation 

they passed did not yield the anticipated result because they were 

misled. Such realization makes it difficult to engage members of 

Congress the next time around. 

5. There is no evidence that Section 1502 has reduced violence in the 

targeted region. In fact, the emergence of the M23 militia last 

spring, which escalated tensions in the Great Lakes, is proof that 

this law has little bearing on war entrepreneurs. 

In Congo, businesses are not the enemies; armed groups and their 

international and local backers are. If we are serious about ending the 

conflict, we should go after the negative forces and help restore state 

authority so that the Congolese government can finally meet its obligations 

toward the people. This means that together we need to work on ending 

impunity at all levels of the polity. Only then can the Congolese know real 

peace. 

The Congolese people want and deserve peace. We should empower them 

to that end. The Congolese government's inability to protect its people or 

control its territory undermines progress on everything else. A competent, 

professional military - organized, resourced, trained and vetted - is 

essential to solving problems from displacement, recruitment of child 

soldiers and gender-based violence, to economic growth or the trade in 

conflict minerals. 

Congo may be a dysfunctional state, or perhaps even a weak state, but this 

does not the Congolese society is weak. The Congolese are among the 

world's most resourceful peoples. We should work with them and support 

them as they strive for solutions that suit their predicament. Above all, we 

4 
53 


81758.018

have to resist the urge to impose Western activists' vision of the world on 

the Congolese. 

I thank you. 

5 
54 


81758.019

" 

Hearing on 

Information Technology Industry Council 

uThe Unintended Consequences of Dodd-Frank's 

Conflict Minerals Provision" 

Testimony of 

Rick Goss 

Senior Vice President of Environment and SustainabiJity 

Information Technology Industry Council (ITI) 

Before the 

Subcommittee on Monetary Policy and Trade 

Committee on Financial Services 

United States House of Representatives 

May 21, 2013 
55 


81758.020

OITI 

May 21, 2013 

Chairman Campbell, Ranking Member Clay and members of the Subcommittee - thank you 

for the opportunity to testify at today's hearing regarding the Democratic Republic of the 

Congo, conflict minerals and section 1502 of Dodd-Frank. 

My name is Rick Goss and I am the Senior Vice President of Environment and Sustainability 

for the Information Technology Industry Council, or ITI. ITI is a global trade association 

representing 50 of the world's most innovative companies in the information and 

communications technology sector. Our members have an abiding commitment to 

sustainability and corporate social responsibility - a commitment we have again 

demonstrated through our strong leadership on conflict minerals. While the minerals and 

metals covered under section 1502 are routinely used by every industry across the global 

economy, tech companies have taken the lead to drive private sector initiatives and secure 

measurable progress. 

Along with governments and civil society, ITI and our members share a commitment to the 

fundamental principles of peace and security for the Congo, and we are dedicated to being 

responsible actors within the context of comprehensive, government-led strategies for 

Central Africa. First, we are committed to ethical sourcing throughout our global supply 

chains. We do not want to conduct business, either directly or indirectly, with any supplier 

that supports, prolongs or perpetuates armed conflict or human rights abuses. Second, we 

want to source cleanly from Central Africa to help provide critical economic benefits to 

hundreds of thousands of people who depend on mining and mining-related activities as 

their sole source of livelihood. With these twin objectives in mind, our sector has made a 

conscious choice to remain engaged in the region. 

Page 2 of6 

www.ITIC.org 
56 


81758.021

OITI 

Even before the Congressional negotiations on conflict minerals culminated in 2010, the tech 

sector was already implementing programs and processes to enhance transparency in global 

supply chains by, among other actions, creating an inclusive industry forum to address 

common supply chain challenges and develop solutions. Our initiatives have continued ever 

since and include: 

Launching the Conflict-Free Smelter Program; 

Establishing clean, in-region sourcing channels in Central Africa; 

Developing and promoting supply chain transparency and reporting measures; and, 

Joining with governments and civil society in the Public-Private Alliance for 

Responsible Minerals Trade. 

Based on our long history of credible engagement and concrete achievements, the tech 

sector can bring unique judgments and perspectives on the impacts of section 1502 and on 

the broader policy debate. Let me begin by relating the positive outcomes that section 1502 

has yielded. 

First, the public debate on conflict minerals has brought desperately needed attention to an 

outright humanitarian crisis that had been largely ignored by the international community. 

Over five million people in Central Africa have suffered premature deaths, primarily related 

to disease and malnutrition, with militias and government soldiers alike regularly committing 

atrocities against civilians. 

Second, the enactment of section 1502 drove other sectors to join with tech to drive policies 

and transparency measures throughout global supply chains. The tech sector has 

continuously promoted corporate due diligence efforts as an important part of a 

coordinated international solution to the challenges in the region, and has supported the 

broad applicability of these requirements across the economy. 

Page 3 of6 

www.ITIC.org 
57 


81758.022

OITI 

Finally, section 1502 helped convince regional governments to engage more fully in mining 

sector reforms. This includes Congolese laws on due diligence and licensing in the minerals 

trade, and coordinated efforts led by the International Conference of the Great Lakes 

Region. 

Section 1502, however, has also created obstacles for companies that want to remain 

responsibly engaged in Central Africa. Simply put, the mechanism contained in section 1502 

encourages companies to avoid the region, while layering regulatory burdens and costs on 

those that stay. Even companies that source cleanly from the covered region must submit a 

full Conflict Minerals Report to the SEC, and must further subject that report to an 

independent private sector audit. Companies that elect to exit the region altogether can 

avoid these obligations. 

This has led to a de facto embargo on minerals from the covered region, with serious 

consequences for local populations. Major smelters report that a majority of their direct 

customers are demanding metals that are (QngQ::{ree, rather than conflil::t:f~. Likewise, 

most companies expend the bulk of their time and resources establishing that they are rrill 

sourcing from the region, rather than developing programs to build clean-sourcing capacity. 

As a consequence, countless companies are fulfilling redundant paperwork obligations: 

developing parallel lists of smelters, reviewing supplier declarations, writing reports and 

scheduling audits. These efforts yield few if any benefits to the people of the Congo. 

Also, because of endemic security and corruption challenges, the volume of materials 

processed through legitimate in-region programs to date has been modest at best. The 

United Nations reports that, even as security has improved at some major mining centers, 

exports of tin, tantalum and tungsten from the eastern DRC have all but halted. The prices 

for uncertified minerals have plummeted, with impoverished artisanal miners earning mere 

Page 4of6 

www.ITIC.org 
58 


81758.023

OITI 

cents on the dollar, while brokers and exporters secure huge profits. The societal impacts 

can be measured in reduced family incomes, limited availability and rising prices for food and 

medicines, and in falling school enrollments. The U.N. also reported Significant black market 

movement of covered minerals from the Congo, and a rush by armed groups and the 

Congolese military to gold mines where due diligence requirements have not impacted 

trade. Furthermore, militias and "criminal, mafia-type networks'" within the Congolese 

Army are exploiting other sources of revenue, through products such as timber, charcoal, 

cannabis, ivory and basic supplies, and through practices such as human trafficking, illegal 

roadblocks and extortion. 

Section 1502, by focusing almost exclusively on the role of the private sector, has diverted 

critical attention away from the indispensable role of governments in addressing the 

endemic political, security and humanitarian crises in the region. Private sector initiatives 

alone cannot succeed in a region beset by rampant conflict and corruption, and destabilized 

by chronic interference and intrusions from neighboring countries. The underlying causes of 

this regional war are political, not economic, and are linked to entrenched ethnic enmities 

and disputes over political power, land rights and citizenship. While control over natural 

resources is in part responsible for fueling violence in eastern Congo, it is striking to note 

that adjacent areas that are equally rich in resources are not plagued by conflict. 

The most recent United Nations Security Council Resolution on the Congo authorized the 

deployment of an "Intervention Brigade" with the stated objective of "contributing to 

reducing the threat posed by armed groups to state authority and civilian security in eastern 

DRC and to make space for stabilization activities." The Security Council took this step in 

large part due to the continued threat posed by the rebel group M23, which has received 

significant logistical and military assistance from other governments in the region. The 

1 See page 75 of the U.N. Group of Experts report: www.un.org/ga/search/view doc.asp?svmbol=SI2010/596 

Page 5 of6 

www.JTIC.org 
59 


81758.024

OITI 

heads of state of ten neighboring countries, meanwhile, recently recommitted to respect 

one another's territorial sovereignty and to refrian from interfering in DRC's internal affairs; 

supporting armed groups; and harboring war criminals. 

Ultimately, corporate efforts alone are no substitute for comprehensive international 

engagement; in the absence of this international will, the status quo will reign in the Congo. 

In closing, ITI and our members urge Congress to consider ways to overcome the deterrent 

effects of section 1502 and provide incentives to companies that responsibly source from 

Central Africa. These efforts could include lowering the regulatory burden; offering a 

federal procurement preference; enacting tax incentives; and, providing public recognition 

to those companies that source through approved, in-region programs. The United States 

and other governments can also support in-region transparency and governance initiatives, 

and can place collective pressure on foreign smelters to participate in our audit program. 

The tech sector will continue to embrace our role as part of the solution, even as we join 

with governments and civil society to press for more concerted and lasting action from the 

international community to resolve the unfolding calamity in Central Africa. 

Thank you again for the invitation to testify today. I would be pleased to answer any 

questions. 

Page 6 of6 

www.ITIC.org 
60 


81758.025

global witness • 

Subcommittee on Monetary Policy and Trade 

Committee on financial Services 

U.S. House of Representatives 

Hearing entitled "The Unintended Consequences of Dodd-frank's Conflict Minerals Provision" 

May21,2013 

Testimony of Sophia Pickles 

Global Witness 

Good afternoon Chairman Campbell, Ranking Member Clay and members of the Subcommittee. 

Thank you for holding this hearing today. My name is Sophia Pickles. I work for Global Witness, a 

non-governmental organization with offices in london and Washington DC that investigates and 

campaigns to break the links between natural resources, corruption and conflict. I lead our campaign 

on eastern Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC) and conflict minerals. 

for twenty years, our investigations into conflict diamonds, illegal logging and corruption in oil, gas 

and mining have been the catalyst for international initiatives and policies to promote transparency 

and ensure that natural resources do not fuel conflict. Since 2004, Global Witness has conducted 

research and advocacy on a broad range of issues relating to natural resources in the DRe. Over the 

past seven years, we have focused on documenting the militarization of mining in the east of Congo 

and the role the trade in minerals plays in financing the conflict there. 

Our work on the minerals trade is directly informed by regular, in-depth field investigations in 

eastern DRC, Rwanda and Burundi. These investigations involve frequent visits to mine sites and 

trading hubs, and interviews with all stakeholders involved in the trade, including artisanal miners 

and local traders, smugglers, mining sector authorities, representatives of the army and mining 

police, and members of local and regional civil society. We also meet regularly with ministers and 

other senior officials in the Congolese, Rwandan and Burundian governments. 

For the last fifteen years, armed groups and members of the national army have used profits from 

the trade in tin, tantalum, tungsten and gold to finance themselves and their operations in eastern 

ORe. The local population in North and South Kivu provinces has borne the brunt of a war 

characterised by murder, rape, pillage and mass displacement. Although the region's mineral wealth 

is not the root cause of the conflict, competition for access to these resources has been an incentive 

for warring parties to continue fighting. 

Minerals that have benefitted armed groups and factions of the army enter global supply chains and 

are used in a wide variety of household and industrial products. As you know, the Dodd-Frank Wall 

Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act includes Section 1502, a provision that requires u.s.-

listed companies to carry out checks on their supply chains to determine whether their purchases 
61 


81758.026

have funded conflict and/or human rights abuses. This provision is an important piece of legislation 

that seeks to break the links between eastern DRC's minerals trade and abusive armed groups. 

The passage of Section 1502 has generated unprecedented levels of international attention on 

mineral supply chains from eastern DRC. The law has led to changes in how international and 

Congolese companies approach supply chain management, catalyzed reform of DRC's domestic 

mining sector and spurred development of a regional mineral certification system. Increased scrutiny 

of certain mines and mineral trading routes in eastern DRC by mining authorities, companies and 

local communities is gradually creating opportunities for transparent and conflict-free sourcing. 

Private sector efforts 

While some U.S. industry associations and companies claim that implementing Section 1502 is too 

costly and burdensome, the substantial efforts made by companies to comply with the law paint a 

different picture. Certain companies have begun to make progress in identifying the origin of the 

metals they use and have published the names of the smelters and refiners in their supply chains. 

Others have invested in closed-pipe sourcing initiatives in eastern DRC. The range and scope of 

these initiatives suggests that the cost to business of sourcing minerals responsibly, and disclosing 

efforts to do so, is not prohibitive. 

In April 2013, Hewlett Packard (HP) published the names of the 195 tin, tantalum and tungsten 

smelters and gold refiners identified in its supply chain.i Apple has been tracking its supply 

chain since 2010; the company's 2012 Supplier Responsibility Report identified 211 smelters 

and refiners in its supply chain. ii Also in 2012, Philips identified the 127 tin, tantalum, tungsten 

smelters and gold refiners that it uses.iii 

• In 2010, the Electronics Industry Citizenship Coalition and the Global e-Sustainability Initiative 

developed the Conflict-Free Smelter Program (CFS), an auditing system for smelters and 

refiners that aims to support company efforts to verify the upstream section of their supply 

chains. The CFS has validated 35 smelters as conflict-free, while another 31 are in the process of 

being evaluated and audited." 

• In October 2012, the Conflict-Free Tin initiative (CFTI), a closed-pipe system in which all players 

in the vertically-integrated supply chain are known, was launched in eastern DRC's South Kivu 

province. Major SEC-listed companies are participating in the project, including firms like Phillips 

who were not previously buying minerals from the Great lakes Region. One month after the 

launch, the front line of fighting between the M23 rebels and Congolese government troops was 

less than 30 miles from the CFTl site.' Although in its early stages, the CFTI is an example of how, if 

properly implemented, responsible sourcing from conflict-affected areas in eastern DRC can 

work. Production levels at the mine site, which typically employs around 1200 artisanal miners, 

have risen steadily and average over 100 tons oftin ore per month.'i 

• In July 2011, Motorola Solutions and AVX launched a closed-pipe sourcing initiative, Solutions for 

Hope, in DRC's Katanga province. Tantalum from the Solutions for Hope sites is sold to CFScertified smelters, helping to ensure that the entire supply chain is conflict-free. Companies 

participating in another dosed-pipe sourcing initiative, Making Africa Work, have committed 

US$l.5m towards the construction of schools, infrastructure and health clinics around the mine 

site. 

Mining sector reform in ORC 
62 


81758.027

Political pressure generated by the passage of Section 1502 prompted changes in eastern DRC's 

mineral sector well before the final rule was published. As early as 2010, Bisie, North Kivu province's 

biggest tin mine, was demilitarised after five years under the control of various factions of the 

Congolese army. For the time being inadequate transport infrastructure linking Bisie to export hubs, 

and legal issues over concession rights have stymied responsible sourcing efforts and left the mine 

vulnerable to incursions by armed groups. Conflict-free sourcing opportunities are emerging in other 

areas in North and South Kivu provinces, however. 

The Congolese Minister of Mines has publically recognized Section 1502 as a 'major opportunity' to 

break the links between minerals and conflict. In February 2012 the Congolese government 

introduced a law requiring companies operating in the country's tin, tantalum, tungsten or gold 

sectors to carry out supply chain due diligence in line with international standards set by the 

Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD). The domestic legislation mirrors 

what companies covered by Section 1502 are expected to do and will complement responsible 

sourcing efforts by u.s. firms. 

The Congolese government reinforced its commitment to clean up mineral supply chains in May 

2012 when it suspended two Chinese-owned trading houses operating in North Kivu, for failing to 

carry out due diligence and sourcing from areas under the control of armed groups. Furthermore, 

the Congolese army's Commander-in-Chief issued a letter to all serving soldiers reiterating that 

members of the military are prohibited from entering mine sites or being involved in the minerals 

trade. 

Section 1502 has also generated momentum at the Great Lakes regional level. The International 

Conference on the Great Lakes Region (ICGLR), a grouping of regional governments set up in May 

2007, is developing a regional mineral certification scheme. The scheme, if implemented properly, 

could provide valuable information and assurances to international traders, smelters and 

manufacturers on the provenance of the minerals they are purchasing and the conditions in which 

they are produced. Boosted by the international attention generated by Section 1502, the ICGLR 

scheme now requires trading companies in the region to meet OECD due diligence standards as a 

condition for having their minerals certified. 

Mineral traders operating in eastern DRC now have a much greater understanding of what supply 

chain due diligence is, how to do it and why it matters. Traders in North Kivu province, who had 

previously turned a blind eye to the conflict minerals trade, have formed a coalition called Save Act 

Mine (SAM) that promotes the implementation of OECD due diligence among members of the 

private sector. Traders have said that this initiative and others like it were developed in response to 

Section 1502, which some see as an opportunity for much needed reform of the trade. 

Local oversight and whistle-blowing groups are also emerging. Congolese civil society organizations, 

such as Observatoire Gouvernance et Paix (OGP), train local communities and members of the 

mining police in how to monitor mining areas and trading routes and report on military or armed 

group involvement. This type of civil society and community engagement is key to preventing armed 

groups from accessing illegal revenues from the minerals trade. 

Impact on mining communities 

Proper implementation of Section 1502 has the potential to substantially improve socio-economic 

prospects for artisanal miners in eastern ORe. Artisanal mining communities are extremely 

vulnerable to the activities of rebel groups and abusive factions of the Congolese army. Diggers 

experience debt bondage, extortion and in some cases, slave-like labor conditions. 
63 


81758.028

Insecurity resulting from the presence of armed groups vying for control of mineral resources is also 

one of the main drivers of poverty in many artisanal mining areas. It restricts freedom of movement 

for communities, limiting access to fields and therefore reducing the volume of agricultural goods 

produced!" Insecurity also reduces the movement of goods and access to markets and renders more 

distant markets inaccessible, restricting the sale of goods to local outlets, which stifles farm 

production and economic activity. Decreased agricultural production and limited access to markets 

impact household income and can mean that families are unable to afford schooling for their 

children. As long as armed groups prey on mining and mineral trading areas, artisanal mining 

communities are likely to remain isolated and possibilities for economic development extremely 

limited. 

The number of companies carrying out due diligence and sourcing from eastern Congo is still limited, 

largely as a result of the uncertainty created by the Securities and Exchange Commission's sixteenmonth delay in publishing the final rule for Section 1502. Just five months into the law's first 

reporting year, it is too early to measure the impact of due diligence on a wide scale. However, in 

sites where closed-pipe supply chains have been set up, there are indications that the 

implementation of due diligence is helping to establish and safeguard conflict-free supply chains. 

Moreover, local monitoring groups have begun to identify and flag risks as they arise. 

Restoring civilian control of eastern DRe's minerals trade and keeping the mining sector free of 

armed group involvement will require full engagement from Congolese and regional authorities and 

from local and foreign companies sourcing minerals from the Great Lakes. The region's gold trade, 

where as yet very little due diligence is being carried out, requires particular attention from 

governments and from companies buying gold. 

Section 1502 represents a milestone in the fight for more transparent and responsible supply chain 

management. Breaking the links between the minerals trade and the conflict will deprive armed 

groups of a significant revenue stream, and the law has already catalyzed international engagement 

in eastern DRe's minerals trade and created opportunities for companies to invest in conflict-free 

supply chains from eastern DRe. If Section 1502 is properly implemented, U.S.-listed companies 

buying minerals from eastern Congo will help the country's vast mineral wealth work for, rather than 

against, the population. 

; http://www8.hp.com/us/en/hp-news/press-release.html?id=1391397#.UZiIZFdnD2A 

;; http://www.apple.com/uk/supplierresponsibility/reports.html 

mhttp://www.annualreport2012.philips.com/annual_report_2012/en/group_performance/social_performa 

nce/conflict_minerals.aspx 

;, 'CFS Program Indicators: 1 May 2013. Accessed here: 

http://www.conflictfreesmelter.org!CFSindicators.htm 

v September 18, 2012 Press Release: "Conflict Free Tin Initiative," Accessed here: http://solutionsnetwork.org!site-cft;jfiles/2012/09/Press-statement-Conflict-Free-Tin-Initiative-Press-Release-18-Sept.pdf 

"'Conflict Free Tin Initiative: Accessed here: http://solutions-network.org!site-cfti/status/ 

"'; Solidarites International RRMP Rapport d'Evaluation Multisectorielle, Banamatumo, page 3 
64 


81758.029

Statement of 

The Institute of Internal Auditors 

House Committee on Financial Services 

~A Ir~ The Institute of 

Internal Auditors 

Subcommittee on Monetary Policy and Trade 

"The Unintended Consequences of Dodd-Frank's Conflict Minerals Provision" 

Chairman Campbell, Ranking Member Clay and members of the Subcommittee: 

The Institute of Internal Auditors (IIA) 1 appreciates the opportunity to submit this statement for 

the record to the hearing ofthe House Financial Services Subcommittee on Monetary Policy and 

Trade titled, "The Unintended Consequences ofDodd-Frank's Conflict Minerals Provision." 

We commend you for holding this important hearing to review the unintended consequences of 

Section 1502 of the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act (DoddFrank), which requires the Securities and Exchange Commission to promulgate rules for public 

companies requiring them to disclose their use of minerals that originate in the Democratic 

Republic of the Congo (DRC), which Section 1502 defines as "conflict minerals.,,2 

We fully acknowledge that Congress's intent for enacting the conflict minerals provision was 

well founded, and we are not expressing an opinion regarding its effectiveness in the DRC. 

However, we would like to use this opportunity to bring to the Subcommittee's attention some 

unintended consequences caused by Section 1502 specifically, and more broadly, the impact of 

mounting compliance burdens being placed on organizations overall: 

(I) Section 1502 may not be the most cost effective way to address the concerns 

expressed by Congress. Companies are undergoing painstaking efforts in preparing 

to comply (and in some cases restructuring their operations to avoid the necessity to 

comply) with the challenging complexity and detail associated with Section 1502. 

This is resulting in an initial and ongoing organizational cost burden that we believe 

may not be the most cost effective way to achieve the goals of the provision; and 

I The Institute of internal Auditors (IIA) is the global professional association that serves as the internal audit profession's global 

voice, recognized authority, acknowledged leader, chief advocate, and principal educator. The IIA's more than 180,000 members 

around the world predominately work in internal auditing, risk management, governance, internal control, infonnation 

technology audit, education, and security. For additional infonnation, visit the IIA's website: www.theiiaorg. 

'Public Law 111-203. 
65 


81758.030

The Institute of 

Internal Auditors 

(2) Section 1502, among other laws and resultant regulations enacted over the past 

ten-plus years, is exacting a toll on organizations that is overly burdensome. 

Organizations do not have unlimited resources and continually diverting resources 

and attention from strategic activities may necessarily require companies to pull back 

from other investments. This calls into question the aggregate cost versus benefit of 

ten-plus years of legislative-driven mandates affecting organizations. It also raises 

concerns regarding the inherent distraction of organizations from their core missions, 

and the inability of risk management and risk mitigation personnel within 

organizations to continue to focus on the primary goal of managing risk (rather than 

determining how best to comply with arguably overly burdensome regulations like 

Section 1502). 

Risk assurance and risk management functions, such as internal audit, are being distracted from 

helping boards and executive management better assess, evaluate and manage risk by being 

pulled into assisting other parts of the organization address a mounting compliance burden. 

Internal auditors provide independent, objective assurance and consulting to their company's 

boards and executive management that is designed to add value and improve an organization's 

operations. These individuals help their organizations accomplish their objectives by bringing a 

systematic, disciplined approach to evaluate and improve the effectiveness of risk management, 

control, and governance processes. Organizational governance, risk management and internal 

control activities are fundamental to well managed companies. 

Proper risk management requires internal auditors to evaluate risk exposures relating to an 

organization's governance, operations, and information systems regarding the following: 

(I) Achievement of the organization's strategic objectives; 

(2) Reliability and integrity of financial and operational information; 

(3) Effectiveness and efficiency of operations and programs; 

(4) Safeguarding of assets; and 

(5) Compliance with laws, regulations, policies, procedures, and contracts. 3 

Such evaluations are fundamental to helping ensure that companies manage risk appropriately, 

especially in this time of globalization, interconnectedness and interdependency with heightened 

concerns regarding systemic risk and the potential impact that a troubled institution may have on 

the nation's financial system and the economy, in general. 

J International Standards/or the Professional Practice of Internal Auditing (Standards), available at 

https:!!na.theiia.orgistandards-guidance/Public%20DocumentslIPPFo/0202013%20English.pdf. 

2 
66 


81758.031

The Institute of 

Internal Auditors 

Section 1502 is an example of where the focus of internal auditors is being taken off of key 

strategic and operational risk assurance practices that are vital to a company's effective risk 

management activities, in order to focus on ensuring appropriate compliance mechanisms are 

established, which are typically not key to a company's operations. 

In this time of economic uncertainty, most public companies are hesitant to hire additional 

internal audit, compliance and/or risk professionals when new laws and/or regulations are 

implemented, like those stemming from Section 1502. Instead, such risk professionals are 

usually required to redirect their activities away from risk-based assessments and other core 

competencies and toward helping companies ensure compliance with new mandates, creating a 

number of likely unintended consequences. Every increased hour spent on such compliance 

activities detracts or lessens the time available to evaluate and assess strategic, financial and 

operational risk management and risk mitigation. While compliance activities may not be the 

most cost effective way to accomplish the public policy objective, public companies are 

unnecessarily impacted. 

Again, the IlA does not question the intentions of Section 1502, but simply wishes to draw the 

Subcommittee's attention to some unintended consequences of this particular provision on u.S. 

companies, as well as signal elevating concerns about the totality of regulatory compliance 

which calls into question the overall toll being placed on companies today. 

Thank you again for the opportunity to submit this statement in relation to the Subcommittee's 

hearing. The IIA looks forward to being a resource to Congress so that it achieves its objectives 

in the most efficient, effective and costlbeneficial manner. 

3 
67 


81758.032

May 20, 2013 

Dear Members of the l-Iouse Financial Services Subcommittee on Monetary Policy and Trade, 

Alma Foundation and partners submits this letter to the hearing record to express our 

support for Section 1502 Dodd-Frank Act. \Vc arc concerned about the documented link 

between the minerals trade and violence in the African Great Lakes region. We believe Section 1502 

has been. and continues to be, a critica! driver in helping address the c~mnict in the eastern Democratic 

Republic of Congo (DRC) by clirninating an source of revenue for armed groups that have 

committed mass atrocities and serious human abuses. We therefore urge Congress and your 

Subcommittee to support and protect the of this provision. 

Congress intended for this provision to humanitarian situation in the 

eastern DRC by curbing the trade in and to investors and the public to invest 

and buy products in an informed way. For over a decade, since the United Nations Group 

exposed the problem, minerals have and continue to fuel conflict and human rights abuses, 

sexual and gender-based violence, in Central Africa and in eastern DRe. This u.s. law 

requiring action has changed the dynamic on the ground improved the international 

marketplace for minerals, and companies have {()Und that conllict-free sourcing can be done. 

Since the law passed, enormous progress has been made: 

• Companies that have made an effort to sourc{;:~ connict-frec have found that it can be donethey can buy conflict-free minerals in the open market, they can buy from 

that has a conf1ict~frec chain that they sel! from, and companies can build 

supply chain just for AI! of these methods exist today. 

o from across manuulcturing industries such as Intel, Philips, Apple, rtP, 

and others have traced their supply chains back to the point of the smelter, the 

choke point in the supply chain crucial to understanding where the minerals in their 

and whether the minerals directly or 

eastern ORC and rnad(;~ the 

o The for Hope initiative \'.iaS established to source conflict free tantalum from 

the DRC and to economic 

o The Conflict free initiative, a ioint and the Dutch 

government, was established to s<.~urce conflict free tin from Kivu in eastern 

[)RC. The Conniet Free Tin initiative over! ,000 artisana! diggers and the 

income of the mine,rs at the mine site has 

o The Conflict Free Smelter Program has certiJled as conHict free 30 smelters and 

refiners. 

• The govemment of the DRC has taken action to demilitarize 

domestic legislation in DRe to carry 

with OECD standards. to 
68 


81758.033

Despite the progress 

on the ground, this 

released. the U.S. 

have made toward implemcntation, as well as the positive momentum 

continues to come under attack. Two months aftcr the final rules \vere 

and two the 

SEC secking to weaken, or eliminate, the provision. 

industry lawsuit that too many actors arc hoping will 

We ask that you use this hearing to acknowledge the 

and to rcaffiml your support for this important 

in eastern Congo. 

Yours sincerely, 

Alysha Atma 

Executive Director, Atma Foundation 

Mille Elodie NTAMUZINDA 

on th~ ground and in the marketplace 

and your commitment to ending the conflict 

Presidente- du Bureau de Coordination Societe Civile dl! Sud Kivu 

Coordinatrice Provincial RRSF 

Cyprien BlRHINGINGWA M!lGABO 

Coordonnateur du CENADEP Kivu SE-COSOC/GL 

Coalition Regionale de la Societe Civile contrc I'Exp!oilation H!cgalc des Ressources Nature!!es 

dans la Region dcs Grands Lncs 
69 


81758.034

CONFERENCE EPISCOPALE NATIONALE DU CONGO 

Prlhidence 

BP.325& Kinshasa lGomhe 

Tel. : 00243 99& 24 8699 

Fax: +33172703031 

E-mail: cenco2009@yahoo.fr 

R6publiquc Dcmocratique du Congo 

N/Ref.: CENCO/PRlNDIJ 7/05/ GOO 0 14 7!2013/BG.2° 

STATEMENT TO THE HOUSE SUBCOMMITTEE 

ON MONETARY POLICY A ... 1'{D TRADE 

BY BISHOP NICOLAS DJOMO 

1 

PRESIDENT OF THE CATHOLIC BISHOPS' CONFERENCE OF THE DR CONGO 

MAY 21, 2013 

I. I am Bishop Nicolas Djomo, Bishop of the Diocese of Tshumbe in the Democratic 

Republic of the Congo (DRC) and President of the Catholic Bishops' Conference of the 

Congo (CENCO in French). I would like to thank the Honorable Representative John 

Campbell, Chairman of the Subcommittee, and the Honorable Representative William 

Lacy Clay, Ranking Member, for the opportunity to offer written statement today. 

2. Today's hearing is about "The Unintended Consequences of Dodd-Frank's Coriflict 

Minerals Provision." Instead, I think we should be talking about "The Unintended 

Consequences of Failure to Implement the Conflict Minerals Provision." We must focus 

on the "unintended consequences" and tremendous human costs of the unregulated, illicit 

trade in minerals that fuels violence. 

3. As I indicated in my previous testimony before this Subcommittee last year, I do not 

come to you as a businessman, nor as a financial expert. I am a religious leader, a pastor, 

who is deeply disturbed by the terrible violence, misery and suffering that has dominated 

life in Eastern DRC since 1996. 

4. Last year I shared horrific stories of death and destruction. You know of the millions of 

deaths due to the ongoing violence and the ghastly number of our women who have been· 

brutally beaten and raped. In addition to the victims who have been maimed, tortured and 

raped, the violence has led to the loss of health centers to treat common, treatable 

diseases. Families, villages and communities have been disintegrated. One prominent 

driver of this violence is the illicit mining and trade in conflict minerals conducted by the 

many armed groups in Eastern DRe. 

5. The Church is not opposed to economic enterprise nor to mining operations per se. But ( 

urge Congress to ensure that mining activity in the Congo serves the common good and 

does not fuel violent destruction of lives and communities. Mining must also be 

conducted in ways that protect the health and environment of affected communities. 

6. Section 1502 of the Dodd-Frank Financial Reform Act is an important step in protecting 

the common good in my country. We ask Congress to ensure that U.S. companies 

consider fully the heavy and gruesome social consequences and emergency assistance 

1 
70 


81758.035

2 

burdens of the illicit mining sector in Eastern Congo as they calculate their costs and 

actions in complying with Section 1502. 

7. The Church believes that business calculations are not just simple cost and income 

estimates on a spreadsheet. Pope Francis recently warned of the "cult of money and the 

dictatorship of an economy which is faceless and lacking any truly humane 

goal."Catholic Social Teaching has consistently called for equitable and sustainable 

economic development. This has been the teaching of Pope John XXIII, Pope Paul VI, 

Pope John Paul II and, in our present day, Pope Emeritus Benedict XVI and now, Pope 

Francis. The economy exists to serve the human person. Simply stated, we cannot allow 

the isolated, cold calculus of corporate profits to prevail when peoples' lives are at stake. 

8. Businesses must take into account a social balance sheet that places appropriate priority 

on the value of the lives that can be saved by the simple act of conducting due diligence 

to determine whether legitimate business transactions are fueling violence and suffering. 

The horrible image of the collapsed clothing factory and the hundreds of lives lost in 

Bangladesh has seared into our consciences the results of irresponsible business practices. 

Congolese die every day in the illegal mines and at the hands of the armed groups that 

destroy communities to chase th.em away from potential mining sites. The international 

community, including our own nation and non-governmental agencies and the Church, 

provide emergency assistance to displaced and traumatized persons and familiesassistance that has real financial costs that do not appear on the balance sheets of 

corporations. In light of these human and social costs, we urge you to protect the Conflict 

Minerals statute and allow the Securities and Exchange (SEC) regulations to go into 

effect as soon as possible. 

9. As Pope Francis noted in addressing the diplomatic corps at the Vatican, "Fighting 

poverty, both material and spiritual, building peace and constructing bridges: these, as it 

were, are the reference points for a journey that I want to invite each of the countries here 

represented to take up .... Here too, it helps me to think of the name of Francis, who 

teaches us profound respect for the whole of creation and the protection of our 

environment, which all too often, instead of using for the good, we exploit greedily, to 

one another's detriment." 

10. Blessed Pope John XXllI, in his 1963 encyclical Pacem in Terris, observed that the 

world was heading towards ever greater unification or globalization. The development of 

a global economy demands the creation of a system of oversight for the universal 

common good of humanity. Consistent with these principles, the Catholic Church has a 

long tradition of urging affected governments, and private mining operators, to manage 

extractive facilities in ways that are safe and productive, respecting the rights of workers, 

c.onsumers and residents in the affected areas. This requires strict compliance with 

applicable health and environmental laws, in conformity with international standards and 

regulatory bodies. 

1 I. In order t.o protect human life and dignity in the Democratic Republic of the C.ongo 

(DRC), the Church publicly supported the passage of Section 1502 of the Dodd-Frank 

2 
71 


81758.036

3 

Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act. In October 2011, I came to the United 

States to defend the Congolese people and to argue for strong and effective regulations 

that would respect the intent of Section 1502 of the Dodd-Frank Act. I met with State 

Department officials, Members of Congress, and then-Chairman Mary Schapiro of the 

Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC). 

12. The situation in the Congo is the most extensive humanitarian tragedy of our time, but it 

is only the latest chapter in a long history of armed pillage of our country. Our beloved 

nation fell prey to what is now called the "resource curse"long before the term was 

coined. In colonial times our land was devastated for its wood, ivory and precious 

metals, using slave labor to extract resources. Only a few years after our country's 

independence, a civil war broke out in the province of Katanga, fueled in large part by the 

industrial-level exploitation of copper. Today, two years after celebrating our 50th 

anniversary of independence, our natural resources continue to be a source of misery and 

suffering, instead of being a resource for peace and prosperity. 

13. Ironically, even though mining is a major source of national income, this wealth has 

created more misery than prosperity. Militia groups attack and destroy whole 

communities to chase them from areas with rich mineral deposits. Rape has been used 

systematically to defile the dignity of women and thus destroy the family, the most 

fundamental building block of society. In this way, not only are communities forced 

from their land, the social fabric has been shredded and the community spirit destroyed. 

Laborers in the mines work under dangerous, unregulated conditions, often under gun 

point and receive meager wages for their hard labor. As a result,communities do not 

thrive; they barely survive under conditions that place them near the bottom of the 

poorest countries of the world. Sadly, this same fate has befallen many other African 

countries, whether it is the "resource curse" of oil in Nigeria and Chad, or "blood 

diamonds" in Sierra Leone. 

14. Throughout DRC's long and bitter history, the Catholic Church has defended and assisted 

the Congolese people. The Church is one of the largest and most trusted institutions in the 

Congo. The Church's nationwide network of schools and health institutions has educated 

and cared for millions of Congolese. Our institutional presence reaches the remotest, and 

the most dangerous, regions of the country. This network is second only to that of the 

national govemment, and frequently works where the government cannot. 

15. The Church also has established many diocesan-level human development institutions 

that work with international NGOs such as Catholic Relief Services (CRS). We empower 

people to produce better crops, set up small businesses, and give hope to women who are 

victims of rape as a weapon of war. 

16. To counter the decades of war and bad governance, the Church created a network of 

Peace and Justice Commissions aimed at empowering civil society to defend the life and 

dignity of all Congolese and to protect people from the effects of war. Church staff 

members, with our development partners, work with communities in the mining areas to 

protect them from violence. Our staff has even met with militia leaders in an attempt to 

3 
72 


81758.037

4 

end the violence and the illicit mining in order to rebuild the communities that have been 

devastated. Most people in Eastern Congo know that their poverty is linked to the 

violence and civil war that surround them. They also realize that this violence is directly 

connected to, and fueled by, illicit mining. 

17. Observers in Eastern Congo have seen a clear geographical overlap between the mining 

locations and the areas where the incidence of rape is high. Once a militia group gains 

access to a mine 's resource~~ they use the revenue from the sale of the minerals to buy 

arms and recruit new militia and mine workers, thereby militarizing the conflict and 

furthering the cycle of violence. 

18. Illicit mines and minerals also exacerbate other causes of violence and suffering. Many 

local and regional sources of conflict stem from questions of identity: that is, who is 

perceived to be an indigenous Congolese. Indigenous Congolese have the right to own 

land. Those who are not Congolese, even if they have resided in Congo for years, can be 

denied ownership of land. Revenue from illicit mines. militarizes the conflict over 

identity and land by injecting deadly firearms that make the conflict more deadly and 

intractable. 

19. Militias also use the firearms purchased from the sale of conflict minerals to extort 

money in the form of "illicit taxes" from citizens. The Church maintains that if the illicit, 

unregulated and unoffiCial mines were removed from militia control and transformed to 

legal, transparent and official operations, these mines would better serve the common 

good of the Congolese people. 

20. Church leaders have visited mining operations. We have seen the Unsafe, dangerous and 

deplorable conditions under which many people, including children, work. With armed 

guards standing over them, these people are like slave labor. We have also seen the 

terrible environmental damage caused by these mines, leeching toxins into the soil and 

water so that villagers have no safe drinking water and their farmlands are destroyed. We 

must not permit the human costs of the recent tragedy in Bangladesh to be similarly 

repeated in the Congo through lax regulation and oversight. This is simply not an 

acceptable costlbenefit analysis. 

21. The Church has learned that there is some controversy over the impact of tIle Dodd-Frank 

law. We are aware that the de faCIa embargo instituted by some companies has led to the 

loss of work in some mines. From our work and extensive network on the ground; we 

know that most people iQ Eastern Congo earn their living, meager as it may be, through 

subsistence agriculture. The mines "employ" a much smaller portion of the population 

and their working conditions often violate their basic, God-given human dignity, Many 

more people have been displaced and damaged by the violence than have received 

income from mines. 

22. The Church also knows that in the long term, people's livelihoods and futures cannot 

truly improve while armed groups control the illegal economy that the mines provide, If 

we can sever the link between the mines and the militias, we believe that we can curtail 

4 
73 


81758.038

5 

the violence and allow people to rebuild their communities and resolve the underlying 

causes of their conflicts. The hundreds of thousands of people who are currently 

displaced and dependent on emergency assistance could return to their homes. The 

women who have been traumatized by rape could receive healing care. Health clinics 

and schools could be rebuilt. Development assistance could be expanded so people can 

move from their meager dependence on subsistence agriculture to better crops. Better 

crops mean families will have more food, can send their surpluses to market, can educate 

their children and may be able to seek employment off the farm. All of these gains in the 

medium and long term will greatly surpass the loss of demeaning work in the mines. 

23. The passage of the Dodd-Frank law has already had a positive impact. In our informal 

talks, small-scale mineral buyers (comptoirs) tell us that they are willing to work with 

civil society and international businesses to establish legal and transparent supply chains 

that would re-establish formal, regulated and safe mines. We hear that international 

businesses have arrived in Eastern Congo to explore how such legal and transparent 

supply chains can be built. USAID has started to invest in this effort to facilitate its 

progress. 

24. Although large amounts of conflict minerals still leave the country, if international 

businesses fuvor legitimate, non-conflict mines, they and international donors can partner 

with the International Conference on the Great Lakes to strengthen the Conference's 

efforts to stop the remaining illicit trade in minerals. This would complement the efforts 

in the DRC to legalize mining in Eastern Congo. These are still daunting tasks, and they 

require the unqualified support of the international business community to do its part. 

25. For too many decades Africa's export of oil, diamonds, precious metals, and minerals has 

been more of a curse than a blessing, but this situation is beginning to take a tum for the 

better. The international movement to ban "blood diamonds" that created the Kimberly 

process was a great global success story. The "Publish What You Pay" initiative is 

another global movement to empower people in developing countries to hold their 

governments accountable for the income that they receive from natural resource 

extraction. 

26. Section 1502 of the Dodd-Frank Act opens yet another chapter in the effort to delink 

conflict, violence and the resultant suffering from the international trade in minerals. It 

was a bold move that showed U.S. global leadership at its best. This act was duly noted 

by other countries of the world, and by international businesses. It displayed the 

willingness of the U.S. government to place the moral values that Americans hold dear 

above a blind search for profit, no matter what the social costs in foreign countries. The 

people of the Congo saw this legislation as a true expression of solidarity with the 

women, families and villages who have suffered at the hands of those who destroy our 

communities to mine our resources. Improvements in transparency of the minerals trade 

in the Eastern Congo are happening largely because of the legislation that you passed in 

these hallowed halls. It is our belief that the rules that the SEC established in August, 

2012, to implement the standards of Section 1502, live up to the laudable goals of the 

Conflict Minerals provision in the Dodd-Frank Act. 

5 
74 


81758.039

6 

27. The Church in the Congo trusts that the international business community can and will 

join us in protecting the life and human dignity of the Congolese people by conducting 

legal, transparent and accountable international commerce. We are confident that they do 

not want to be part of the violence and suffering that has plagued Eastern Congo over the 

last fifteen years. 

28. We have full confidence in the good will of the Congress, the SEC and business sector to 

realize that this is not the time to water down legislative standards or SEC rules to half 

measures that may save money, but cost lives. What the people of the Congo need and 

the U.S. Government and American companies can provide are simple and responsible 

actions that increase transparency and reflect the moral values that made the United 

States a respected world leader. 

Kinshasa, May 17,2013 

+ Nicolas DJOMO 

Bishop of Tshumbe 

\:P'·P.~iri"'1t of the DR Congo Bishops' Conference 

6 
75 


81758.040

May 20, 2013 

Monetary Policy & Trade Subcommittee 

2129 Rayburn House Office Building 

Washington, D.C. 20515 

Dear Subcommittee Members: 

"'iNe are a multi-stakeholder group representing diverse organizations including companies from 

several industrial sectors; sustainable, responsible and faith-based investors (SRIs); and nongovernmental organizations including several human rights activists. 

In response to the subcommittee hearing entitled "The Unintended Consequences of Dodd-Frank's 

Conflict Minerals Provision," we are submitting a relevant written statement. 

Attached please find a statement our multi-stakeholder group issued on the challenge to the 

conflict mineral 1502 rule. It was signed and published by 39 multi-stakeholder participants on 

the website http://VVW\V .sourcingnetwork.org/sec/ on 20 November 2012. 

Sincerely, 

Patricia Jurewicz 

Director, Responsible Sourcing Network 

Convener of the multi-stakeholder group 

Enclosure 

1611 Telegraph Ave., Suite 1450· Oakland, CA 94612' 510 735 8145' sourclI)gnetwerk erg 
76 


81758.041

Multi-stakeholder Group Statement on the Challenge to Conflict Minerals Rule 

We are a multi-stakeholder group ("MSG") representing diverse organizations including issuers from 

several industrial sectors; sustainable, responsible and faith-based investors; and non-governmental 

organizations. 

Since 2009 - predating the passage of the conflict minerals legislation (Section 1502 of the Dodd-Frank 

Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act) - the MSG has been working together to develop an 

agenda for action to address the conflict in the Democratic Republic of Congo ("DRC") by cutting off 

funding from trade in conflict minerals. After the law was passed, the MSG began to develop consensus 

policy positions on the Securities and Exchange Commission ("SEC") rulemaking to implement the 

provision. In the course of this rulemaking, we came together to file four separate comment letters', 

meet with SEC Commissioners and staff', and several MSG participants sat on panels at the SEC's 

Roundtable on Conflict Minerals in October 20113• Our extensive efforts in this rulemaking were 

evidence of the shared concern we have about this issue and our belief that we could become part of 

the solution through bringing transparency to the supply chains for these minerals. 

Recently, a petition was filed by the National Association of Manufacturers, the US Chamber of 

Commerce, and the Business Roundtable for judicial review of the final rule implementing Section 1502. 

The MSG would like to take this opportunity to urge all stakeholders to continue the important work 

underway to address the critical issue of transparency in the supply chains for these minerals. Our 

organizations will also continue to work towards this end, as we strongly believe these efforts are a 

matter of corporate social responsibility. In this context, we would like to make three points: 

• As early as 2007, companies and industry associations, working with investors and advocacy 

groups, have developed programs that advance responsible sourcing of minerals. Several 

initiatives, such as those coordinated through the Electronics Industry Citizenship Coalition 

(EICq and Global e-Sustainability Initiative (GeSI) Workgroup were initiated before Section 1502 

was enacted and many MSG members will continue regardless of this lawsuit. 

By establishing expectations within our supply chains, we are creating demand for responsibly 

sourced minerals. 

Ultimately, a cross-industry approach to this issue is needed for responsible sourcing of minerals 

from the Great lakes region in Central Africa. The active participation of all stakeholders is 

needed to make meaningful progress. We welcome additional participation in the development 

and implementation of a common approach. 

The organizations in the MSG will continue to work together to eliminate the link between violence and 

human rights abuses and the mineral trade in the DRC and surrounding countries regardless of the 

lawsuit. We all agree that the violence and abuse in this region of the world must end and that an 

important part of the solution is the efficient and responsible minerals sourcing process in which many 

MSG members are already participating. 

1 MSG submissions: November 17. 2010. March 2. 2011, August 22. 2011. and November 10. 201l. 

2 MSG had in-person meetings and one group conference call with SEC staff, SEC commissioners, or Commissioner Schapiro on: 

Nov/17/10, Mar/11/ll. Jun/22/11. Feb/13/l2. Feb/lS/12. and Feb/l7112. 

3 MSG panelists: Tim Mahin, Advanced Micro Devices Inc.; Bennett Freeman, Calvert Investments; Darren Fenwick, Enough 

Project; Sandy Merber. General Electric Company; Mike Davis, Global Witness; and Susan Baker, Trillium Asset Management. 

19-Nov-12 
77 


81758.042

Advanced Micro Devices, Inc. AMD 

Africa Faith and Justice Network 

American Baptist Home Mission Societies 

Boston Common Asset Management 

Bureau d'Etudes Scientifiques et Techniques 

Calvert Investments 

Child Labor Coalition 

Christian Brothers Investment Services, Inc. 

Comboni Missionaries 

Congo Global Action 

19-Nov-12 
78 


81758.043

CREA: Center for Reflection, Education and 

CREA 

Dell, 

Enough Project 

Everence Financial 

Future 500 

General Electric 

Hewlett-Packard Company 

Intel Corporation 

Interfaith Center Corporate Responsibility 
79 


81758.044

Jewish World Watch 

KEMET Electronics Corp, 

Marianists IntprJ,,,,'ICH1" 

Mercy Investment Inc. 

Midwest Responsible '"""OC"""ont 

Missionary Oblates Mary "TIm,,,,, ,,,,p 

JPIC office 

Motorola Solutions Inc. 

National Consumers 

NEllnvestments 

19-Nov-12 
80 


81758.045

Partnership Africa Canada 

Responsible Sourcing Network, 

a project of As You Sow 

Royal Philips Electronics 

Sisters of St. Dominic of Caldwell, NJ 

Sustainalytics 

Trillium Asset Management, LLC 

Tri-State Coalition for Responsible Investment 

US SIF: The Forum for Sustainable and 

Responsible Investment 

Veris Wealth Partners 

Wespath Investment Management 

19·Nov·12 

o 

PAfUH£RSHIP AfRICA CANADA 

I'ARl'i.NAIl3AT AFRlatJ!: CANAOA 

RESPONSIBLE 

sourcing network 

PHILIPS 

~ 

G TRILLIUM ClJ Assn MANAGEMENT' 

• VERIS Wealth "".... Partners 

Values. Wealth. SustainabHity. 

ylf 

Wespath