Clean Diamond Trade Act

It is estimated that around 3.7 million people in Africa have died as a result of wars funded by conflict diamonds.[5] Failed elections,[6] money laundering, civil wars (in Angola, Liberia, and other parts of Africa) etc. have encouraged a significant amount of illegal gem sales, with profits aiding rebel forces like the Revolutionary United Front and the National Union for the Total Independence of Angola (UNITA) and allowing for the continuation of civil unrest. Though reports differ, it is estimated UNITA produced about $600 million in diamonds annually in the late 1990s.[7] These funds are used for foreign representation, travel, commodity procurement, and arms purchases, among other things.[8] Angola's decades-long civil war looked as though it was ending in 1992, when its first multi-party democratic elections were held, but UNITA leader Jonas Savimbi declared the election "neither free nor fair" after he lost, and the fighting resumed.[9] (The United States, under the Ronald Reagan administration and his successor, George H. W. Bush, had strongly supported Savimbi and the UNITA rebels in the late 1970s as he advocated for democracy and freedom[10] during the Cold War.) The United Nations took several steps to attempt to discipline these rebel actions, including restricting travel of UNITA senior officials,[11] and prohibiting the sale of petroleum and related products from any country to Angola through United Nations Security Council Resolution 864. United States president Bill Clinton issued executive order 12865[12] to add U.S. sanctions in addition to the UN's efforts. In 1998 UNITA repealed another peace treaty and returned to war with the Angolan army, prompting the United Nations Security Council to investigate sanctions-busting operations and helping focus international attention on the link between diamonds and conflict in Africa.[13]

On 28 November 2000, in Gaborone, Botswana, negotiators for dozens of diamond exporting and importing countries ended over a year of negotiations and agreed on the elements of an international certification program,[13] which would become the Kimberley Process Certification Scheme, adopted by the UN at their 79th plenary meeting on 1 December.[14] The Washington Times wrote, "If the White House fails to immediately shore up the legislation, blood diamonds will symbolize Mr. Clinton's stained legacy in Africa"; especially because, as "the world's largest diamond jewelry market",[5] the United States had more of a responsibility to take initiative in supporting the KPCS and in the CDTA legislation. Without US support, the rest of the world had much less incentive to join the program.[2]

The KPCS system was implemented by the bill as the main deterrent to blood diamonds. Participating countries and industries and civil society observers meet twice each year to improve and refine the systems that have led diamonds to be one of the most monitored and audited natural resources in the world.[15][16] Participation is open to all who "are willing and able to fulfill [its] requirements": diamonds must be transported in tamper proof containers with a government validated certificate as to authenticate their origins.[5][17] It was able to reduce the ease with which conflict diamonds entered the legitimate diamond market within its first few years of implementation.[2] But, membership in the system is voluntary, so non-compliance is a constant issue. The Republic of Congo, Côte d'Ivoire, and Venezuela were all accused of violations and expelled from the scheme in the mid-2000s;[18] since then, Congo has been reinstated as a full participant, but Côte d'Ivoire and Venezuela were demoted to members. They are allowed to trade rough diamonds with KPCS participants, but not with non-members.[19]

Reports submitted to the United Nations Security Council in October 2002 charge that both the Angolan rebel leader, Mr. Jonas Savimbi, and the Liberian government still violate the trade and weapons bans with the help of a global network of arms dealers, diamond merchants and natural resources companies.[13] Other logistical issues continue to hinder the success of the KPCS. Terrorist organizations can transport diamonds over borders without detection and convert them back into banknotes whenever they need the money.[20] Leaders have to use discretion when increasing sanctions, because though they help to discourage conflict diamonds, they can also stunt the growth and development necessary for the countries' fragile economies. "It's clear that international traders are always ready to bypass the sanctions and buy diamonds coming from UNITA," UN official Juan Larrain said in 2000.[21]

The Clean Diamond Trade Act was revised several times before a version of the bill was successfully passed by Congress, and signed into law by the President of the United States. The very first version of the CDTA, H.R 2722, was introduced in the US House of Representatives by Rep.Amo Houghton, a Republican from New York on September 2, 2001, to the 107th Congress.[22] There were 112 cosponsors: 84 Democrats, 27 Republicans, 1 Independent.[23] The bill was referred to the House Ways and Means, and then the Subcommittee on Trade.[24] Eventually, the bill was debated on the House Floor. It successfully passed in the House with a vote of 408–6 on Nov.28th 2001. The bill was placed on the Senate Legislative calendar, but no further action was taken.[22]

In 2002, Sen. Dick Durbin of Illinois introduced a version of the bill in the Senate with 11 Co-sponsors: 8 Democrats, 2 Republicans, 1 Independent.[25][26] The bill was read twice in the Senate and was ultimately referred to the Committee on Finance. The committee went no further with the bill. The bill never made it to the Senate Floor, and no vote was taken.[27]

On March 25, 2003, Rep. Amo Houghton reintroduced the CDTA, as H.R 1415, to the 108th Congress.[28] The bill was co-sponsored by 60 members of the House of Representative: 42 Democrats, 17 Republicans, and 1 Independent.[29] The bill was introduced in the House, and referred to the House International Relations, House Ways and Means, and finally to the Subcommittee on Trade. The bill failed to be put up for a vote, and went no further.[30] In the same 108th Congressional Session, Sen. Chuck Grassley, a Republican from Iowa, introduced another version of the bill in the Senate.[31] The bill was entitled S.760, and it was introduced on April 1, 2003, with 20 Co-Sponsors: 13 Democrats, 7 Republicans.[32] The bill was read, and then referred to the Committee on Finance. The Committee passed the bill and it was placed on the Senate Legislative Calendar. However, once the bill reached the floor, the Senate indefinitely postponed it by unanimous consent.[31] This resulted in the bill never being voted on.

On April 3, 2003, Rep. Houghton introduced a similar bill, H.R 1584, to the House of Representatives with 3 co-sponsors: 2 Republicans, 1 Democrat.[33][34][35] In Section 4 and 5 of S.760, it states that the President should report to Congress.[36] In Section 4 and 5 of H.R 1584, it states that the President should report to the "appropriate congressional committee".[37] In Section 6 of S. 760, the Secretary of State is responsible for publishing in the Federal Register the required information, but the responsibility was given to the President in H.R 1584. The bill passed with a vote of 419–2 vote.[38] The bill was then sent to the Senate and passed with unanimous consent. The bill was presented to the president April 14, 2003, and it was signed on April 25, 2003, thus becoming law.[39] Section 4 of the new law required President George W. Bush to “prohibit the importation into, or exportation from, the United States of any rough diamond, from whatever source, that has not been controlled through the Kimberley Process Certification Scheme (KPCS)."[33] In order to adhere to this new law, President George W. Bush signed Executive Order 13312.[40][41]

The Kimberly process operates through voluntary participation, self-examination, and peer-review.[58] The United States is the world's largest diamond market, and in 2001 legislators decided to take action to ban the importation of illegally mined diamonds.[59][60] Representative Tony P. Hall (D-OH) led on the issue in Congress and introduced the Clean Diamonds Act, H.R. 918, on March 7, 2001, to lessen U.S. involvement in this illicit diamond trade. The bill prohibits individuals or corporations from importing rough diamonds into the United States unless the extracting and intermediary countries utilize export and import controls verifying the legitimacy of the diamonds.[60][61] H.R. 918 does this by ensuring that the import of diamonds into the United States meets specified requirements that are consistent with United Nations Resolution 55/56 "H.R. 918, Clean Diamonds Act." Resolution 55/56, being the document adopted by the general assembly in 2000 aimed at breaking the link between the transaction of illicit diamonds and armed conflict.[14][60]

The bill however, faced opposition from the Bush administration, which did not want to create additional trade restrictions, and it did not pass. Following the failure of the Clean Diamonds Act, NGO's used advertising and public demonstrations to link diamonds to the extreme violence in Sierra Leone and other diamond mining countries in order to appeal to ethical consumerism.[62] non-governmental organizations (NGOs) such as Global Witness, Oxfam, Partnership Africa Canada and Amnesty International used gruesome images of victims with their hands and feet cut off along with war images to portray the violence perpetuated by illegal diamond mining in Africa.[62][63]

In addition to directly targeting diamond vendors, media outlets continued coverage on the global implications of African conflict being fueled by diamonds. In early November 2001, the Washington Post broke the story that conflict diamonds helped finance Al Qaeda, the group responsible for the September 11 attacks on the World Trade Center and the Pentagon in 2001.[62][63]