But Global Witness, the British-based lobby group, told IRIN that progress towards reaching consensus on the peer review mechanism was slow. "It is really disappointing, especially since the peer review system has the backing of the major diamond producer countries, international NGOs and the World Diamond Council. However, despite this strong support there has been resistance from some countries, including Zimbabwe and India. It is ironic that there should be any objections, especially since it's a voluntary system," Global Witness campaigner, Alex Yearsley, told IRIN.
Global Witness dismissed arguments that setting up an impartial auditing system had not been part of the Kimberley agreement. "Independent monitoring is crucial to the credibility of the scheme and, therefore, part of the certification process. The peer review system is a constructive mechanism to ensure compliance," Yearsley said.
Under the Kimberley scheme, chaired by South Africa, diamond producer countries are obliged to issue certificates proving that gems come from legitimate mines. Exporting countries that failed to respect the deal would be prevented from selling diamonds, and could face international sanctions.
Although the scheme was widely seen a positive step in curbing the trade in "blood" diamonds, advocacy groups have argued since its inception that the process was flawed, because of the failure to develop strong verification and monitoring measures. They have called for regular, impartial monitoring to ensure the certification system is transparent.
Another concern was the lack of progress in the collection and analysis of statistics, which are seen as an important tool for detecting trade in "conflict" diamonds. "There are a significant number of governments that have failed to submit the required statistics, calling into question their commitment to the Kimberley Process," Yearsley said.
No comments:
Post a Comment