Forty-five countries engaged in the diamond trade finally signed a new scheme to stem the flow of ”conflict” diamonds yesterday.
The certification scheme, which will take effect on January 1, is the result of 30 months of negotiations on controlling the trade in illicit rough diamonds.
Such diamonds have contributed to the civil wars in the Democratic Republic of Congo, Sierra Leone and Angola. Several UN reports have named those responsible for the illegal trade and the accompanying death toll.
The agreement to curb the trade was signed in Interlaken, Switzerland, by such diamond-producing countries as South Africa, Botswana and Russia and representatives of the countries which cut the diamonds. Antwerp, the biggest diamond centre in Europe, was represented by the European Union.
Alex Yearsley, a representative for Global Witness, which led the campaign against ”conflict” diamonds, expressed reservations about the monitoring scheme.
But overall, he said,”we are happy with the agreement. It is great that the governments signed up to it.” He added: ”Hopefully, it will stop a good 80-90% of conflict diamonds.”
The worldwide production of rough diamonds was worth five-billion pounds last year.
Under the scheme certificates will be issued which are supposed to track the diamonds from the point of origin.
It is virtually impossible to distinguish between rough diamonds from conflict zones and those mined legitimately in countries such as Botswana.
Unscrupulous dealers often mixed up illicit diamonds with those mined legitimately.
One reason why the diamond industry agreed to clean up the trade was fear of a backlash comparable to that which hit the fur trade.
Peter Meeus, managing director of the Antwerp High Diamond Council, which handles 80% of world trade in rough diamonds, told an industry congress in London last week that the ”post-conflict-diamond era” had arrived.
The industry will issue certificates to buyers promising that ”the diamonds herein invoiced have been purchased from legitimate sources not involved in funding conflict and in compliance with United Nations resolutions.” – Guardian Unlimited (c) Guardian Newspapers Limited 2001