exclusive
Human rights activists accuse German car manufacturers of not taking sufficient action in their supply chains due to possible human rights violations. You have lodged a complaint with the Federal Office of Economics and Export Control.
There were tumultuous scenes that took place a few weeks ago at the Volkswagen shareholders’ meeting. Demonstrators disrupted the event, chanted slogans and tore up posters. “End Uyghur forced labor at VW” read about it.
One of the reasons for the protests was the joint plant of VW and the Chinese state-owned company SAIC in the Chinese province of Xinjiang. In the region, the Uyghur minority has been systematically oppressed and forced to work for years. At the end of the event, there were not only chants, a cake also flew in the direction of the chairman of the supervisory board, Hans Dieter Pötsch.
human rights activist file a complaint
The debate about possible human rights violations in the supply chains of the German auto industry has occupied corporations like VW for years – and now also a German authority, the Federal Office of Economics and Export Control. Human rights activists from the European Center for Constitutional and Human Rights (ECCHR) filed a complaint there based on the Supply Chain Act. It is directed not only against VW, but also against Mercedes Benz and BMW. The complaints lie with him ARD-political magazine Report Mainz and “Table Media” exclusively.
In it, the human rights activists try to explain in detail to what extent the individual suppliers of the three car manufacturers could benefit from possible forced labor in the Uyghur province. The basis of the complaint is above all a large-scale investigation by the University of Sheffield Hallam in England, which also took a look at possible suppliers to German car manufacturers.
“We consider these reports about possible forced labor in the suppliers of VW, Mercedes and BMW to be extremely worrying,” says Miriam-Saage Maass from ECCHR. “However, we cannot see that the companies take this risk sufficiently seriously.”
Supply Chain Law obliges companies
That is why the human rights activists are asking the Federal Office of Economics and Export Control to initiate an investigation into the three companies. It should check how companies deal with the risk of possible forced labor and whether they meet the requirements of the supply chain law. Because the law obliges companies to ensure compliance with human rights along the entire supply chain. If they don’t do this, they face severe penalties.
The sinologist Björn Alpermann, who has been researching the situation in Xinjiang at the University of Würzburg for years, has analyzed the complaints against the car manufacturers. He, too, assumes that Uyghurs often have to work under duress, often organized by state work programs and monitored by Communist Party authorities.
However, it is extremely difficult to prove this compulsion for individual supplier companies. Because the situation on the ground allows neither human rights activists nor journalists to research freely. Alpermann therefore does not see any clear evidence of forced labor at suppliers to VW, BMW and Mercedes.
But he sees clear indications of forced labor in the supply chains of all three companies. “The human rights activists bring enough arguments to prove a justified initial suspicion.” He therefore considers ECCHR’s complaints to be appropriate, because the law expressly requires that companies not only act when there is evidence, but also when there are suspicions.
Automaker: Suppliers must respect human rights
All three companies shared at the request of Report Mainz and “Table Media” said that they had no knowledge of ECCHR’s complaints and that they did not have them. Therefore one cannot comment on the content. However, the corporations generally emphasize the importance of human rights. Volkswagen, for example, announced that business partners must reject any deliberate use of forced and compulsory labor and all forms of modern slavery. BMW and Mercedes say that suppliers are contractually obliged to comply with standards. Mercedes also wrote that they were in contact with their business partners and were urging clarification of the allegations.
The Federal Office of Economics and Export Control declined to comment on the complaints. The authority generally pointed out that the applicant “must be directly affected by the violation or at least by its effects”. It is therefore questionable whether the complaints will have any consequences for the automotive companies and the situation in Xinjiang.