The Kimberley Process is a 'perfect cover story' for blood diamonds

Blood diamonds, and the harrowing stories behind them, entered public consciousness more than a decade ago. But while attitudes towards how gems are sourced have shifted, in practice little has changed in the jewellery industry. The very system set up to eradicate the trade in conflict diamonds is now giving the industry a perfect cover story, as it continues to operate in the same opaque way it always has.

The Kimberley Process is a certification scheme established in 2003 by a United Nations resolution, following a series of reports which first exposed the link between the diamond trade and the financing of conflict.

The process has two main flaws. First, its narrow terms of certification focus solely on the mining and distribution of conflict diamonds, meaning that broader issues around worker exploitation - the health and safety of working conditions, the use of child labour and fair pay – are not addressed. It also fails to deal with entire populations being evicted from their ancestral homes to make way for mining.

Second, a Kimberley Process certificate does not apply to an individual stone but to a batch of rough diamonds which are then cut and shipped around the world. Without a tracking system, this is where the trail ends.

If a consumer went into almost any jeweller in the UK and asked for the origin of a diamond on display, staff would most be most unlikely to be able confirm which country, let alone the mine, it was sourced from.

The Kimberley Process has failed on its own terms: corruption and smuggling are rife, and in the past few years, the system has begun to unravel further from the inside.

Global Witness, one of the first organisations to report the link between the mineral industry and conflict, was an official observer to the process at its outset. But the organisation walked away several years ago after the scheme authorised exports from two companies operating in the Marange diamond fields in Zimbabwe. The Zimbabwean army seized control of the area in 2008, reportedly killing about 200 miners in the process.

Meanwhile, the departure of Ian Smillie, of Partnership Africa Canada (PAC), in 2009 was quickly followed by the resignation of Martin Rappaport, a leading figure behind the process's formation. For him, the deciding factor was the abundance of diamonds on the market that had been sourced from the Marange diamond fields, the same region which prompted Global Witness to walk away.

Combine these withdrawls and you have a system propped up by the very people that profit from the industry maintaining its status quo. The Kimberley Process provides a convenient smokescreen.

The European Union this year announced draft plans for a new system aimed at controlling the import of minerals from conflict zones. But the scheme's remit doesn't include diamonds, possibly because its creators mistakenly believe that there is a reliable, credible system already in place for the gemstone.

NGOs play a major role in making consumers aware of the ethical issues that surround diamond mining. The reality is that the diamond business will only improve when it has no choice but to change or face falling profits.

So how can we help to move things forward? While the Kimberley Process's credibility may have been damaged beyond repair, there are successful schemes elsewhere which offer hope for the diamond industry.

The Fairtrade Foundation's standard for gold has been in operation since 2012, helping artisan miners obtain a fair price, safer working practices and greater investment in their communities. Perhaps something similar could be attempted for diamond miners?

The "track and trace" model used by some Canadian brands also points towards a practical solution. Companies that mine diamonds in the frozen tundra of northwest Canada provide comprehensive traceability for their gems. Each cut and polished diamond is laser-inscribed with a unique tracking number that consumers can independently verify, allowing them to track its journey along the supply chain.

Could all diamond miners and producers replicate this system? From a technology and process point of view, it's relatively straightforward. The difficulty lies in trying to establish a credible third-party organisation that would oversee a system where conflict diamonds and the issues of child labour, fair pay and unsafe working conditions are all taken into account.

Groups such as the Fairtrade Foundation or the Diamond Development Initiative would certainly be credible enough to take on the role of administrator, but they would need the support of a wide range of bodies – including governments and private companies – to create a system broad enough to address all the issues surrounding conflict diamonds.

A Fairtrade diamond standard coupled with a rigorous track and trace system would certainly address the two big flaws in the Kimberley Process. Whether that becomes a reality remains to be seen, but in the meantime there's something you can do to help that will begin to clear the smoke screen around conflict diamonds.

The next time you are buying a piece of jewellery for an anniversary or birthday, or are planning to propose to your partner, simply ask the jeweller which mine the diamond came from.

David Rhode is co-founder of Ingle & Rhode, an ethical jeweller based in London

Join the community of sustainability professionals and experts. Become a GSB member to get more stories like this direct to your inbox