Regional instability and conflict have plagued the Great Lakes Region for decades, not only causing human tragedies but also impacting on the region’s economic development potential. To foster stability and cooperation, the states of the region formed the International Conference on the Great Lakes Region and established the Pact on Security, Stability and Development for the Great Lakes Region. A Regional Initiative against the Illegal Exploitation of Natural Resources (RINR), endorsed by the heads of state in 2010, forms an important core component of the Pact. The RINR includes six inter-linked tools that ICGLR member states committed to implement, namely formalization of the ASM sector; a regional mineral certification mechanism (RCM); the EITI; a database on conflict mineral flows in the region; a whistle blowing mechanism; and the harmonization of relevant national legislation across the region.

The twelve member states of the ICGLR essentially correspond to the same countries affected by the US Dodd-Frank Act on conflict minerals (focusing on the DRC and its adjoining countries; additional ICGLR members include Kenya and Sudan). As such, the ICGLR platform is theoretically in an ideal position to disseminate and channelize supply chain due diligence efforts in the region as recommended for responsible sourcing in line with the OECD Due Diligence Guidance. This is targeted through the RCM whose standards and procedures were drafted based on the OECD/UN due diligence framework.

Developed by international consultants with support by development partners, the RCM framework was formally adopted by the RINR Steering Committee (a group of government mining sector representatives from ICLGR member states) and confirmed by a regional ministers’ summit in late 2011. RCM implementation is done under the authority of individual member states; procedural details of implementation may vary among different countries even though they should all adhere to the same standard in the end. The RCM standards and procedures are outlined in the RCM Manual and its Appendix.

The RCM implementation framework in individual ICGLR member states is (theoretically) based on a national regulation (directly referencing the regional standards, as is the case in, for example, Rwanda and the DRC). It shall include (1) mine site inspections by the national mining authority; (2) chain of custody tracking (operation of the tracking scheme may be outsourced); (3) mineral export shipment certification (via a national certification unit working in coordination with inspection and chain-of-custody management departments), and (4) data management and exchange with the ICGLR secretariat for all of the above processes. Issuing ICGLR certificates for individual 3TG mineral export shipments shall certify that all of the above processes comply with regional RCM standards and, hence, comply with due diligence sourcing principles for conflict minerals. However, credible independent verification of these national-level procedures is required to provide assurance for such claims, both at the level of individual supply chains as well as for the system as a whole.

The RCM envisages to provide such assurance procedures through auditing and monitoring by third parties anchored to the regional (ICGLR) level. This regional assurance framework includes (1) third party audits of individual supply chains (focusing on mineral exporters as the principal auditee, including a sample of associated supply chains up to the mine level), (2) system-level compliance monitoring and on-going risk assessments by the office of the Independent Mineral Chain Auditor, and (3) establishing a whistle blowing mechanism in each country. While initial donor support has partly been granted to operationalize several aspects of the above framework in 2011-2016, the ICGLR member states are required to facilitate an economically sustainable auto-financing mechanism to ensure its longer-term operation.

Duplication between government- and industry-led efforts forms a significant risk for the credibility and sustainability of institutionalized due diligence mineral sourcing from the region. The RCM framework is primarily targeting due diligence in the upstream mineral supply chain segment (from mine to exporter). This area is also covered through parallel industry-led due diligence initiatives and partial overlap between the resulting assurance procedures exists as far as 3T minerals are concerned. This becomes critical when considering the impacts resulting from process duplication on effectiveness, efficiency and economic viability of the various procedures, and when further considering the need for scalability of established systems to larger areas of the eastern DRC and elsewhere. Effective alignment and coordination of efforts on the background of establishing a regionally level playing field becomes increasingly urgent.

The operational costs for long-term implementation of due diligence schemes need to be economically viable through auto-financing. Third-party funding (e.g., via donors) is always targeting the short-term and, hence, lacks an adequate perspective for sustainability. Private sector-led due diligence activities in the regional 3T sector have the advantage of often being auto-financed in selected areas, that is, where logistics and the local security framework are relatively straightforward and local production levels are sufficiently high. In such cases, auto-financed implementation costs refer to ca. 3% of the respective mineral export value for the scheme’s implementing agencies (additional costs may be internally incurred by implementing companies).

At the mine site level, besides enforceable red- and yellow flag standards (focusing on compliance with OECD Due Diligence recommendations), the RCM currently includes a range of “progress criteria” modelled along the standards of the Certified Trading Chains (CTC) scheme. The CTC scheme is targeting responsible artisanal mining practice (environment, health and safety, community relations, formality of operations). Within the RCM these criteria may be monitored but are not enforced. Certification under the RCM solely focuses on assuring supply chain due diligence.

In the DRC, regulatory attempts have been made to harmonize both schemes and make their implementation mandatory, along with additionally introduced procedures, such as joint mine site validation missions. However, so far, comprehensively reconciling the various formal and practical procedures applicable in the DRC has not been straightforward. Therefore, it is generally advisable for international stakeholders sourcing from the DRC to verify what specific procedures and standards are actually enforced in a given mineral supply chain. This helps in differentiating discussions on “certification” and evaluating the assurance implicitly or explicitly provided through such processes.