Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-r5fsc Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-23T20:53:10.939Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Responses to the Uyghur Crisis and the Implications for Business and Human Rights Legislation

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  14 October 2021

Rosa POLASCHEK Open the ORCID record for Rosa POLASCHEK [Opens in a new window]
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

As has now been well publicized, there is serious and credible evidence that Uyghur and other minority communities in China are being forced into internment or ‘re-education’ camps,1 with strong links to subsequent forced labour in factories, particularly centred in Xinjiang province.2 The use of forced labour (intimately connected to many international supply chains) as a hallmark feature of the Chinese state’s oppression of its Uyghur peoples requires a ‘business and human rights’ (BHR) lens to responses to the human rights violations in the region.

Keywords

business and human rights legislationforced labourhuman rights due diligencestate obligationsUyghur
Type
Developments in the Field
Information
Business and Human Rights Journal , Volume 6 , Issue 3 , October 2021 , pp. 567 - 575
Copyright
© The Author(s), 2021. Published by Cambridge University Press

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Footnotes

Conflicts of interest: The author declares no conflict of interest.

*

Independent Researcher.

References

1 Emma Graham-Harrison, ‘China has built 380 internment camps in Xinjiang, study finds’, The Guardian (24 September 2020), https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/sep/24/china-has-built-380-internment-camps-in-xinjiang-study-finds (accessed 2 June 2021).

2 Vicky Xiuzhong Xu et al, ‘Uyghurs for Sale’, Australian Strategic Policy Institute (1 March 2020), https://www.aspi.org.au/report/uyghurs-sale (accessed 2 June 2021); Anna Fifield, ‘China compels Uyghurs to work in shoe factory that supplies Nike’, The Washington Post (29 February 2020), https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/asia_pacific/china-compels-Uyghurs-to-work-in-shoe-factory-that-supplies-nike/2020/02/28/ebddf5f4-57b2-11ea-8efd-0f904bdd8057_story.html (accessed 2 June 2021).

3 Newslines Institute for Policy and Strategy, ‘The Uyghur Genocide: An Examination of China’s Breaches of the 1948 Genocide Convention’, Newlines Institute for Strategy and Policy (8 March 2021), https://newlinesinstitute.org/uyghurs/the-uyghur-genocide-an-examination-of-chinas-breaches-of-the-1948-genocide-convention/ (accessed 2 June 2021); BBC News, ‘Uyghurs: MPs state genocide is taking place in China’, BBC News (23 April 2021), https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-56843368 (accessed 2 June 2021); John Hudson, ‘As tensions with China grow, Biden administration formalizes genocide declaration against Beijing’, The Washington Post (30 March 2021), https://www.washingtonpost.com/national-security/china-genocide-human-rights-report/2021/03/30/b2fa8312-9193-11eb-9af7-fd0822ae4398_story.html (accessed 2 June 2021).

4 Jillian Ambrose and Jasper Jolly, ‘Revealed: UK solar projects using panels from firms linked to Xinjiang forced labour’, The Guardian (25 April 2021), https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2021/apr/23/revealed-uk-solar-projects-using-panels-from-firms-linked-to-xinjiang-forced-labour (accessed 2 June 2021).

5 For example, the Non-Financial Reporting Directive 2014/95/EU.

6 European Parliament Resolution on human rights and social and environmental standards in international trade agreements (2009/2219(INI)) (25 November 2010), European Parliament, ‘European Parliament resolution of 25 November 2010 on human rights and social and environmental standards on international trade agreements (2009/2219(INI))’, https://www.europarl.europa.eu/doceo/document/TA-7-2010-0434_EN.html (accessed 3 June 2021); Parliamentary question on the ban on the import into the EU of products manufactured in Laogai camps (E-002019-13), European Parliament, ‘Parliamentary questions: 25 February 2013’, https://www.europarl.europa.eu/doceo/document/E-7-2013-002019_EN.html (accessed 3 June 2021); Motion for a Resolution on the import of goods into the European Union produced in the People’s Republic of China at forced labour camps generally known by the name Laogai (2013/2708(RSP)), European Parliament, ‘Motion for A Resolution: further to Question for Oral Answer B7-0000/2013’, https://www.europarl.europa.eu/meetdocs/2009_2014/documents/inta/re/1001/1001885/1001885en.pdf (accessed 3 June 2021); European Parliament resolution on the implementation of the 2010 recommendations of Parliament on social and environmental standards, human rights and corporate responsibility (2015/2038(INI)) (5 July 2016), European Parliament, ‘Texts adopted: Tuesday, 5 July 2016 – Strasbourg’, https://www.europarl.europa.eu/doceo/document/TA-8-2016-0298_EN.html (accessed 3 June 2021); Parliamentary question on EU ban on imports of goods produced using slavery (E-003922/2019), European Parliament, ‘Parliamentary questions: 20 November 2019’, https://www.europarl.europa.eu/doceo/document/E-9-2019-003922_EN.html (accessed 3 June 2021).

7 European Parliament resolution on forced labour and the situation of the Uyghurs in the Xinjiang Uyghur Autonomous Region (2020/2913(RSP)) (17 December 2020), European Parliament, ‘Texts adopted: Thursday, 17 December 2020 – Brussels’, https://www.europarl.europa.eu/doceo/document/TA-9-2020-0375_EN.html (accessed 3 June 2021). This followed European Parliament resolution on China, notably the situation of religious and ethnic minorities (2019/2690(RSP)) (18 April 2019) and the European Parliament resolution on the situation of the Uyghurs in China (China Cables) (2019/2945(RSP)) (19 December 2019).

8 Human Rights Council, ‘Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights: Implementing the United Nations “Protect, Respect and Remedy” Framework’, A/HRC/17/31 (21 March 2011).

9 Nicole Gaouette and James Frater, ‘US and allies announce sanctions against Chinese officials for “serious human rights abuses” against Uyghurs’, CNN (23 March 2021), https://edition.cnn.com/2021/03/22/politics/us-eu-china-uyghur-sanctions/index.html (accessed 2 June 2021).

10 European Commission, ‘Press release: EU and China reach agreement in principle on investment’, European Commission (30 December 2020), https://ec.europa.eu/commission/presscorner/detail/en/ip_20_2541 (accessed 2 June 2021); Vincent Ni, ‘EU efforts to ratify China investment deal “suspended” after sanctions’, The Guardian (4 May 2021), https://www.theguardian.com/world/2021/may/04/eu-suspends-ratification-of-china-investment-deal-after-sanctions (accessed 17 June 2021).

11 Foreign, Commonwealth & Development Office, ‘UK Government announces business measures over Xinjiang human rights abuses’, Government of the United Kingdom (12 January 2021), https://www.gov.uk/government/news/uk-government-announces-business-measures-over-xinjiang-human-rights-abuses (accessed 2 June 2021).

12 UK Home Office, ‘Transparency in supply chains consultation: Government Response’, Government of the United Kingdom (22 September 2020), https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/919937/Government_response_to_transparency_in_supply_chains_consultation_21_09_20.pdf (accessed 2 June 2021).

13 Foreign and Commonwealth Office, ‘Overseas Business Risk – China’, Government of the United Kingdom (2 March 2021), https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/overseas-business-risk-china/overseas-business-risk-china (accessed 2 June 2021).

14 Congress has also passed various specific laws aimed at forced labour, including the H.R.6210 – Uyghur Forced Labor Prevention Act and the updated H.R.1155 – Uyghur Forced Labor Prevention Act.

15 Tariff Act 1930 (US), sec 307.

16 19 CFR § 12.42(e); see US Customs and Border Protection, ‘Forced Labour’, https://www.cbp.gov/trade/programs-administration/forced-labor (accessed 12 June 2021).

17 US Customs and Border Protection, ‘CBP Issues Region-Wide Withhold Release Order on Products Made by Slave Labor in Xinjiang’, U.S. Customs and Border Protection (13 January 2021), https://www.cbp.gov/newsroom/national-media-release/cbp-issues-region-wide-withhold-release-order-products-made-slave (accessed 2 June 2021).

18 See, for example, in relation to Uniqlo: Lisa Du, ‘U.S. Blocked Uniqlo Shirts on Xinjiang Forced-Labor Concerns’, Bloomberg (19 May 2021), https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2021-05-19/u-s-blocked-uniqlo-shirts-on-xinjiang-forced-labor-concerns (accessed 2 June 2021). As at 23 May 2021, the CBP had removed its ruling on Uniqlo’s import from online circulation. See International Trade Today, ‘CBP Removes Recent Uniqlo Forced Labor Rulings’, International Trade Today (21 May 2021), https://internationaltradetoday.com/news/2021/05/21/CBP-Removes-Recent-Uniqlo-Forced-Labor-Rulings-2105210021 (accessed 2 June 2021).

19 For selected discussion, see Elsa Savourey and Stéphane Brabant, ‘The French Law on the Duty of Vigilance: Theoretical and Practical Challenges Since its Adoption’ (2021) 6:1 Business and Human Rights Journal 141–152; Nora Jauer, ‘Don’t Settle For Less: Thoughts on the Current Draft German Supply Chain Act’, Völkerrechtsblog (22 April 2014), https://voelkerrechtsblog.org/dont-settle-for-less (accessed 12 June 2021).

20 Subject to delays after the European Commission’s Regulatory Scrutiny Board rejected the proposal: see Sarah Anne Aarup et al, ‘Europe Inc. wins as EU delays new business rules’, Politico (21 May 2021), https://www.politico.eu/article/europe-inc-puts-brussels-new-business-rules-on-ice/ (accessed 2 June 2021).

21 European Parliament resolution with recommendations to the Commission on corporate due diligence and corporate accountability (2020/2129(INL)) (10 March 2021).Google Scholar

22 Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs, ‘Due diligence on forest risk commodities’, https://consult.defra.gov.uk/eu/due-diligence-on-forest-risk-commodities/ (accessed 17 June 2021).

23 Such as H&M: Michael Standaert and agencies, ‘Nike and H&M face backlash in China over Xinjiang statements’, The Guardian (25 March 2021), https://www.theguardian.com/world/2021/mar/25/nike-and-hm-face-backlash-in-china-over-xinjiang-statements (accessed 2 June 2021).

24 Grady McGregor, ‘How brands are responding to China’s Xinjiang boycotts: deleting past statements or all-out flip-flops’, Fortune (26 March 2021), https://fortune.com/2021/03/26/brands-respond-xinjiang-cotton-china-hm-zara-hugo-boss-fila/ (accessed 17 June 2021).

25 See the historical protectionist origins of the Act, set out in Sandra L Bell, ‘The US Prohibition on Imports Made with Forced Labour: The New Law Is a ‘Force’ to Be Reckoned With’ (2016) 11:11/12 Global Trade and Customs Law 581.

26 Corporate Accountability Lab, ‘Using the Master’s Tools to Dismantle the Master’s House: 307 Petitions as a Human Rights Tool’, Corporate Accountability Lab (31 August 2020), https://corpaccountabilitylab.org/calblog/2020/8/28/using-the-masters-tools-to-dismantle-the-masters-house-307-petitions-as-a-human-rights-tool (accessed 10 June 2021).