|
Get AfricaFocus Bulletin by e-mail!
on your Newsreader!
Print this page
USA/Congo (Kinshasa): Conflict Minerals Law
AfricaFocus Bulletin
Aug 2, 2010 (100802)
(Reposted from sources cited below)
Editor's Note
There is little doubt that exports of "conflict minerals" --
including cassiterite, columbite-tantalite, wolframite and gold --
controlled by rebel groups and by units of the Congolese army
itself contribute to ongoing conflict in eastern Congo. It is more
difficult to say how much difference the new legislation requiring
transparency from U.S. companies about the supply chain of these
minerals will make.
Reacting to the hype of some of the most ardent advocates of the
legislation, some critics say it will make little difference and
evades the necessity to confront more directly responsibilities of
governments, including Rwanda, Uganda, and the Democratic Republic
of the Congo itself. Of course there is much disagreement among
commentators about the distribution of blame among these
governments.
This AfricaFocus Bulletin contains a nuanced discussion of the
issue by Jason Stearns, who formerly headed the UN Group of Experts
which reported on conflict minerals and says the legislation is to
be welcomed although its impact may be limited. His blog
(http://congosiasa.blogspot.com/) contains his views,
comments, and links to other commentators on the subject.
Also contained in this Bulletin are the remarks by one of the
sponsors of the legislation, Senator Russell Feingold, and an
extract of the most important provisions from the legislation
itself.
For additional background on conflict minerals, see particularly
the websites of the Enough Project (http://www.enoughproject.org/conflict_areas/eastern_congo)
and of Global Witness (http://www.globalwitness.org/)
Two other AfricaFocus Bulletins released today also deal with the
Democratic Republic of the Congo. One, sent out by e-mail and also
available on the web at http://www.africafocus.org/docs10/lum1007.php, contains several
short articles reporting on new evidence of U.S. complicity in the
assassination of Patrice Lumumba. Another, available at
http://www.africafocus.org/docs10/cgk1007b.php, analyzes the
dangers in continuing collaboration of UN Peacekeeping forces with
Congolese government troops.
For previous AfricaFocus Bulletins related to Congo (Kinshasa),
visit http://www.africafocus.org/country/congokin.php
For previous AfricaFocus Bulletins on U.S. policy, visit
http://www.africafocus.org/country/usa-africa.php
++++++++++++++++++++++end editor's note++++++++++++++++++++
Feingold Statement on Congo Conflict Minerals and Transparency
Amendments to Financial Regulatory Reform Bill
Wednesday, May 19, 2010
http://feingold.senate.gov/record.cfm?id=325061
Mr. President, I am pleased to be an original cosponsor of two
amendments to the Restoring American Financial Stability Act that
seek to ensure there is greater transparency around how
international companies are addressing issues of foreign corruption
and violent conflict that relate to their business. Creating these
mechanisms to enhance transparency will help the United States and
our allies more effectively deal with these complex problems, at
the same time that they will also help American consumers and
investors make more informed decisions.
Mr. President, I am very pleased that my colleagues agreed
yesterday to accept the first amendment, sponsored by Senator
Brownback. This amendment specifically responds to the continued
crisis in the eastern region of the Democratic Republic of Congo.
Despite efforts to curb the violence, mass atrocities and
widespread sexual violence and rape continue at an alarming rate.
Some have justifiably labeled eastern Congo as "the worst place in
the world to be female." Several of us in this body, including
Senators Brownback and Durbin and I, have traveled to this region
and seen first-hand the tragedy of this relentless crisis.
Increasingly, American citizens are also learning of the
devastating situation in eastern Congo and are actively engaged to
bring about policy changes. I am pleased to see Americans so
engaged on this issue.
One of the underlying reasons this crisis persists is the
exploitation and illicit trade in natural resources, specifically
cassiterite, columbite-tantalite, wolframite and gold. The United
Nations Group of Experts has reported for years how parties to the
conflict in eastern Congo continue to benefit and finance
themselves by controlling mines or taxing trading routes for these
minerals. In response to these reports, the UN Security Council
adopted Resolution 1857 (2008), encouraging Member States "to
ensure that companies handling minerals from the DRC exercise due
diligence on their suppliers." Over a year ago, Senator Brownback,
Senator Durbin and I teamed up to author legislation that would do
just that: the Congo Conflict Minerals Act, S.891.
Mr. President, Senator Brownback's amendment is taken from that
bill, but includes modifications based on discussions with
representatives from industry, U.S. government agencies and the
Banking Committee. The amendment applies to companies on the U.S.
stock exchanges for which these minerals constitute a necessary
part of a product they manufacture. It will require those companies
to make public and disclose annually to the Securities and Exchange
Commission if the minerals in their products originated or may have
originated in Congo or a neighboring country. Furthermore, it will
require those companies to provide information on measures they
have taken to exercise due diligence on the source and chain of
custody to ensure activities involving such minerals did not
finance or benefit armed groups.
I recognize that this conflict minerals problem is a complex one,
given the importance of this trade to the local economy in eastern
Congo and given the extensive supply chains and processing stages
between the source and end-use of these minerals. The Brownback
amendment was narrowly crafted in consideration of those
challenges, and it includes waivers and a sunset clause after five
years. However, I believe strongly that the status quo in eastern
Congo is unacceptable to the people there and it should be to us as
well. We have put financial resources toward mitigating this
crisis, but we need to get serious about addressing the underlying
causes of conflict. The Brownback amendment is a significant,
practical step toward doing that, and I thank my colleagues for
their support of it. I thank Senator Brownback for his longstanding
leadership on these important humanitarian issues.
Mr. President, the second amendment, led by Senator Cardin and
Senator Lugar, is different than the Congo amendment, but would
complement it. This amendment would require companies listed on
U.S. stock exchanges to disclose in their SEC filings extractive
payments made to foreign governments for oil, gas, and mining. This
information would then be made public, empowering citizens in
resource-rich countries in their efforts to combat corruption and
hold their governments accountable. In far too many countries,
natural resource wealth has fueled corruption and conflict rather
than growth and development. This so-called "resource curse" is
especially problematic in Africa, and in 2008, I chaired a
Subcommittee hearing on this very topic. I said then that we must
look for ways that the United States can use our leverage to push
for greater corporate transparency in Africa's extractive
industries.
In addition to helping countries combat the "resources curse," it
is also in our national interest to improve transparency in the
extractive industries. The amendment was drawn from an important
piece of legislation, the Energy Security through Transparency Act,
S.1700. The bill was given this title because enhancing
transparency in the extractive industries can have real benefits
for U.S. energy security. This will ultimately create a more open
investment environment and increase the reliability of commodity
supplies. Energy security is a topic that Senator Lugar and his
staff have worked on for years, and we all know how central it is
to our national security. I thank Senator Lugar and Senator Cardin
for their work on this important amendment, and I urge my
colleagues to support it.
Why legislation on mineral trade is a good thing
Jason Stearns
July 26, 2010
http://congosiasa.blogspot.com /
direct URL: http://tinyurl.com/2d39t5l
[For additional background analysis by Jason Stearns, see
http://alexengwete.blogspot.com/ / direct URL:
http://tinyurl.com/y28dwu9]
There has been some debate of late in the blogosphere about the US
legislation on improving supply chain due diligence with regards to
Congolese minerals. See http://texasinafrica.blogspot.com
(direct URL: http://tinyurl.com/2v9jo5o) for an interesting debate
on Texas in Africa on this topic. The main criticisms can be boiled
down to this:
- Minerals are not the main issue. Land conflict, communal
tensions, state weakness and failed demobilization programs are
more important. (Texas in Africa, Pole Institute,
http://tinyurl.com/2fadc3r)
- By tarring the whole mineral trade with the brush of conflict
minerals, we could end up in a boycott of a sector that provides
livelihoods to up to a million people in the region. (Resource
Consulting Services / http://www.resourceglobal.co.uk/, Dan Fahey
/ http://tinyurl.com/y8pksuq)
- The way advocates like ENOUGH portray the role of minerals in the
conflict is simplistic and often wrong. That kind of advocacy can
be dangerous. (All of the above sources)
I have been a critic of the sensationalism of the "conflict
minerals" lobby in the US. But I do support the bill (as do many
other advocacy groups) both on principle and because it could
contribute to rendering the Congolese state more accountable. Here
are my responses to some of the criticisms.
1. Minerals were not the origin of the conflict, and many other
factors are important. However, proceeds from minerals are a key
pillar in financing these groups.
I myself have often chided pundits for reducing the conflict to a
spectacle of savage Africans raping the country in order to get
their hands on minerals. The conflict began more or less in 1996
(although the roots are much deeper) following the collapse of the
Zairian state, the arrival of a million Rwandan refugees after the
Rwandan genocide, and as local conflicts over land, identity and
power got out of control. Minerals did not play a major role in
this initial phase.
Minerals have, however, taken on a large role in the local economy
and the conflict since then. In 2008, at the height of conflict in
North Kivu, official statistics record around $30 million in tin,
wolframite and coltan exports from the province. The real level of
exports were probably at least two to three times as high due to
smuggling, and this is without accounting for extralegal gold
trade, which the Congolese senate estimated to be around $1,2
billion a year, mostly from the eastern Congo.
In 2008, I was the head of the UN Group of Experts. It was clear
that the FDLR, Congolese army and the CNDP all benefited from this
trade to the tune of millions of dollars a year. Talking with
members of armed groups, it was very clear that minerals trade was
important to the CNDP, FDLR, some Mai-Mai groups and the Congolese
army. While some of this has changed since then (ex-CNDP and other
Congolese arm units have taken over many mines previously
controlled by the FDLR), minerals still play an important role in
the conflict economy. If we assume that access to resources and
power plays a key role in the Congolese conflict, then we have to
assume that the minerals trade is at the core of the conflict.
Having said that, we must be sure not to reduce the conflict to
minerals, minerals, minerals. The charcoal trade around Goma alone
was estimated to total $30 million a year by the national park, and
armed groups benefit from this, as well. Cattle herding plays a key
role in the conflict, as the ex-CNDP in particular has deployed its
soldiers to protect tens of thousands of cattle, worth $300-$900
each, many of which have crossed the border from Rwanda. And
coffee, tea, fuel and timber also play a large role in the local
economy. En bref, armed groups can benefit from any profitable
trade in the region, not just from minerals.
Of course, the economy is not the only thing driving the conflict;
people don't just fight due to greed. Conflict over land tenure has
long antagonized local communities, fueled ethnic divisions and
driven youths into armed groups. The immigrations of tens of
thousands of Rwandan Hutu and Tutsi to Masisi in the 1930-1960
period further poisoned these communal relations and led many to
claim that the descendants of these communities are not really
Congolese.
Institutional weakness is another important factor in the conflict,
as the Congolese army is desperately corrupt and weak, allowing
space for small militia groups to form, often buying weapons from
the very army that is supposed to get rid of them. Local land
conflicts blow out of proportion because the administration cannot
deal with them; military abuses go unchecked because the courts do
not have the resources and clout to prosecute.
And yet, I do not see how promoting due diligence in the mineral
trade will prevent us from addressing these other issues, as well.
Instilling accountability in the minerals supply chain can have
positive externalities on the Congolese administration in general
by helping to promote accountability, strengthen the capacity of
the revenue collection agencies and provide an incentive to the
government to crack down on the local power barons who benefit from
the trade. In order for this to be the case, however, donor efforts
need to focus on working with the relevant Congolese state agencies
(Ministry of Mines, CEEC, SAESSCAM, Cadastre minier, OFIDA
Hence, I agree with Pole Institute and Nick Garrett/Harrison
Mitchell of RCS that in the end we need to strengthen the state and
make the minerals trade more transparent. But I think that a key
way of doing this is by implementing audits that will require
Congolese traders and the Congolese state to be more transparent in
the way they deal with the minerals trade. Without strong
incentives, the trade will continue the way it is.
2. In terms of strategy, promoting supply chain due diligence is
smart.
We have been trying for years in the United States and Europe to
promote greater involvement in the Congolese conflict. Largely in
vain. Donors have thrown money at the conflict and deployed a
peacekeeping operation there, but for the most part we just don't
care enough.
That has changed with the emphasis on sexual violence and conflict
minerals. Of course, some of this focus in unsavory in the way it
distorts the facts. Indeed, I think the reason there has been such
a backlash against "conflict minerals" advocacy has been due to the
way these voices depict the violence. As I have said before,
militias in the Congo do not rape women just because they want to
get their hands on minerals. Most minerals in cell phones do not
come from the eastern Congo. The war did not begin as a conflict
over minerals. And so on. I find a lot of this kind of lobbying
distasteful - we do not need to tweak the facts to get attention,
it's bad enough already, just present the facts.
But, for the first time since the beginning of the conflict, this
lobbying has prompted a substantive push by legislators in the US.
We now have a meaningful piece of legislation asking the Security
and Exchange Commission to regulate the supply chain. This will be
difficult to implement, but in the end should do something that I
applaud: render companies accountable for the conditions under
which their product is produced. As a consumer, I do not want my
sneakers to be made by 9 year-olds , I do not want my sweatshirts
to be produced in abusive workshops. If we can introduce
legislation to promote accountability in the business sector in the
eastern Congo, it is a good thing.
Yes, I wish we could have greater engagement in strengthening the
Congolese judiciary and police. I wish there could be meaningful
land reform and that disputes over farming rights could be settled
by expert mediators (UN Habitat is beginning to do this). I wish we
could have transparent democratic institutions throughout the
country. But none of those issues stand necessarily in
contradiction with due diligence in the minerals trade. I can't
tell you how often I have been in meetings with officials at the
State Department, insisting that they help in security sector
reform and in paying attention to the return of Congolese Tutsi
refugees. Nothing much came of that. Now that we have a chance to
help promote meaningful reform in the minerals trade, I think we
should seize the opportunity.
Of course, we should remind our interlocutors in Washington, New
York, Kinshasa, Kigali, London, Addis and Paris at every step of
the way that we want greater engagement on strengthening state
capacity, promoting checks and balances, enhancing judicial
capacity and independence and reforming the army.
But this does not stand in contradiction to due diligence in the
minerals trade.
S.891 - Congo Conflict Minerals Act of 2009 (Introduced in Senate)
[Wording of original bill, later incorporated into amendment to
financial reform bill, taken from http://thomas.loc.gov.]
SEC. 2. FINDINGS.
Congress finds the following:
(1) The Democratic Republic of Congo was devastated by a civil war
carried out in 1996 and 1997 and a war that began in 1998 and ended
in 2003, which resulted in widespread human rights violations and
the intervention of multiple armed forces or armed non-state actors
from other countries in the region.
(2) Despite the signing of a peace agreement and subsequent
withdrawal of foreign forces in 2003, the eastern region of the
Democratic Republic of Congo has continued to suffer from high
levels of poverty, insecurity, and a culture of impunity, in which
illegal armed groups and military forces continue to commit
widespread human rights abuses.
(3) According to a study by the International Rescue Committee
released in January 2008, conflict and related humanitarian crisis
in the Democratic Republic of Congo have resulted in the deaths of
an estimated 5,400,000 people since 1998 and continue to cause as
many as 45,000 deaths each month.
(4) Sexual violence and rape remain pervasive tools of warfare used
by all parties in eastern region of the Democratic Republic of
Congo to terrorize and humiliate communities, resulting in
community break down which causes a decrease in the ability of
affected communities to resist control by illegal armed forces and
a loss of community access to minerals. Sexual violence and rape
affect hundreds of thousands of women and girls, frequently
resulting in traumatic fistula, other severe genital injuries, and
long-term psychological trauma.
(5) A report released by the Government Accountability Office in
December 2007 describes how the mismanagement and illicit trade of
extractive resources from the Democratic Republic of Congo supports
conflict between militias and armed domestic factions in
neighboring countries.
(6) In October 2002, the United Nations Group of Experts on the
Democratic Republic of Congo called on member states of the United
Nations to adopt measures, consistent with the guidelines
established for multinational enterprises by the Organization for
Economic Co-operation and Development, to ensure that enterprises
in their jurisdiction do not abuse principles of conduct that they
have adopted as a matter of law.
(7) In February 2008, the United Nations Group of Experts on the
Democratic Republic of Congo stated, `individuals and entities
buying mineral output from areas of the eastern part of the
Democratic Republic of Congo with a strong rebel presence are
violating the sanctions regime when they do not exercise due
diligence to ensure their mineral purchases do not provide
assistance to illegal armed groups' and defined due diligence as
including the following:
(A) Determining the precise identity of the deposits from which the
minerals they intend to purchase have been mined.
(B) Establishing whether or not these deposits are controlled or
taxed by illegal armed groups.
(C) Refusing to buy minerals known to originate, or suspected to
originate, from deposits controlled or taxed by illegal armed
groups.
(8) In its final report, released on December 12, 2008, the United
Nations Group of Experts on the Democratic Republic of the Congo
found that official exports of columbite-tantalite, cassiterite,
wolframite, and gold are grossly undervalued and that various
illegal armed groups in the eastern region of the Democratic
Republic of Congo continue to profit greatly from these natural
resources by coercively exercising control over mining sites from
where they are extracted and locations along which they are
transported for export.
(9) United Nations Security Council Resolution 1857, unanimously
adopted on December 22, 2008--
(A) broadens existing sanctions relating to the Democratic Republic
of Congo to include `individuals or entities supporting the illegal
armed groups . . . through illicit trade of natural resources,';
and
(B) encourages member countries to ensure that companies handling
minerals from the Democratic Republic of Congo exercise due
diligence on their suppliers.
(10) Continued weak governance in the Democratic Republic of Congo
has allowed the illicit trade in the minerals columbite-tantalite,
cassiterite, wolframite, and gold to flourish, which empowers
illegal armed groups, undermines local development, and results in
a loss or misuse of tax revenue for the Government of the
Democratic Republic of Congo. The development of stronger
governance and economic institutions that support legitimate
cross-border trade in such minerals would--
(A) help prevent the exploitation of such minerals by illegal armed
groups; and
(B) enable the hundreds of thousands of people who depend on such
minerals for their livelihoods to benefit from such minerals.
(11) Metals derived from columbite-tantalite, cassiterite,
wolframite, and gold from the Democratic Republic of Congo are used
in diverse technological products sold worldwide, including mobile
telephones, laptop computers, and digital video recorders.
(12) In February 2009, the Electronic Industry Citizenship
Coalition and the Global e-Sustainability Initiative released a
statement asserting that--
(A) use by the information communications technology industry of
mined commodities that support conflict in such countries as the
Democratic Republic of Congo is unacceptable; and
(B) electronics companies can and should uphold responsible
practices in their operations and work with suppliers to meet
social and environmental standards with respect to the raw
materials used in the manufacture of their products.
(13) Notwithstanding the extensiveness of the supply chains of
technological products and the extensiveness of the processing
stages for the metals derived from columbite-tantalite,
cassiterite, wolframite, and gold used in such products, companies
that create and sell products that include such metals have the
ability to influence the situation in the Democratic Republic of
Congo by--
(A) exercising due diligence in ensuring that their suppliers
provide raw materials in a manner that does not-- (i) directly
finance armed conflict; (ii) result in labor or human rights
violations; or (iii) damage the environment;
(B) verifying-- (i) the country from which the minerals used to
derive such metals originate; (ii) the identity of the exporter of
the minerals; and (iii) that all appropriate tax payments are made;
and
(C) committing to support mineral exporters from the Democratic
Republic of Congo who-- (i) fully disclose their export payments;
and (ii) certify that their minerals do not-- (I) directly finance
armed conflict; (II) result in labor or human rights violations; or
(III) damage the environment.
SEC. 3. STATEMENT OF POLICY
It is the policy of the United States, as affirmed by the
Democratic Republic of Congo Relief, Security, and Development
Promotion Act of 2006 (Public Law 109-456; 22 U.S.C. 2151 note) and
consistent with United Nations Security Council Resolution 1857
(2008), to promote peace and security in the eastern Democratic
Republic of Congo by supporting efforts of the Government of the
Democratic Republic of Congo, other governments in the Great Lakes
Region of Africa, and the international community--
(1) to monitor and stop commercial activities involving the natural
resources of the Democratic Republic of Congo that contribute to
illegal armed groups and human rights violations in the Democratic
Republic of Congo; and
(2) to develop stronger governance and economic institutions that
can facilitate and improve transparency in the cross-border trade
involving the natural resources of the Democratic Republic of Congo
in order to reduce exploitation by illegal armed groups and promote
local and regional development.
SEC. 4. INVESTIGATION, REPORTS, AND STRATEGY REGARDING
COLUMBITE-TANTALITE, CASSITERITE, WOLFRAMITE, GOLD, AND HUMAN
RIGHTS ABUSES IN THE DEMOCRATIC REPUBLIC OF CONGO.
(a) Support of Mandate of United Nations Group of Experts on the
Democratic Republic of Congo- The President, acting through the
Secretary of State, the United States Permanent Representative to
the United Nations, and other appropriate United States Government
officials, shall use the voice and vote of the United States at the
United Nations Security Council to renew the mandate and strengthen
the capacity of the United Nations Group of Experts on the
Democratic Republic of Congo to investigate links between natural
resources and the financing of illegal armed groups, and ensure
that the Group of Experts' recommendations are given serious
consideration.
(b) Map of Mineral-Rich Zones and Armed Groups in Democratic
Republic of Congo-
(1) IN GENERAL- Not later than 120 days after the date of the
enactment of this Act, the Secretary of State shall, consistent
with the recommendation from the United Nations Group of Experts on
the Democratic Republic of Congo in their December 2008 report,
work with other member states of the United Nations and local and
international nongovernmental organizations-- (A) to produce a map
of mineral-rich zones and armed groups in the eastern region of the
Democratic Republic of Congo; and (B) to make such map available to
the public.
(2) UPDATES- The Secretary of State shall update the map required
by paragraph (1) not less frequently than once every 180 days until
the Secretary of State certifies that no armed party to any ongoing
armed conflict in the Democratic Republic of Congo or any other
country is involved in the mining, sale, or export of
columbite-tantalite, cassiterite, wolframite, or gold, or the
control thereof, or derives benefits from such activities.
(c) Guidance for Commercial Entities- The Secretary of State shall,
consistent with the recommendation from the United Nations Group of
Experts on the Democratic Republic of Congo in their December 2008
report, work with other member states of the United Nations and
local and international nongovernmental organizations to provide
guidance to commercial entities seeking to exercise due diligence
on their suppliers to ensure that the raw materials used in their
products do not-- (1) directly finance armed conflict; (2) result
in labor or human rights violations; or (3) damage the environment.
(d) Strategy-
(1) IN GENERAL- Not later than 180 days after the date of the
enactment of this Act, the Secretary of State shall, working with
the Administrator of the United States Agency for International
Development, submit to the appropriate congressional committees a
strategy to address the linkages that exist between human rights
abuses, armed groups, and the mining of columbite-tantalite,
cassiterite, wolframite, and gold in the Democratic Republic of
Congo.
(2) CONTENTS- The strategy required by paragraph (1) shall include
the following:
(A) A plan to assist the Government of the Democratic Republic of
Congo and other governments in the region in establishing and
effectively implementing the necessary frameworks and institutions
to formalize and improve transparency in the trade of
columbite-tantalite, cassiterite, wolframite, and gold.
(B) An outline of assistance currently being provided and an
assessment of future assistance that could be provided by the
Government of the United States to help the Government of the
Democratic Republic of Congo strengthen the management and export
of natural resources in the eastern region of the Democratic
Republic of Congo.
(C) A description of punitive measures that could be taken against
individuals or entities whose commercial activities are supporting
illegal armed groups and human rights violations in eastern
Democratic Republic of Congo.
(e) Annual Human Rights Reports- In preparing those portions of the
annual Country Reports on Human Rights Practices relating to the
Democratic Republic of Congo or countries that share a border with
the Democratic Republic of Congo, the Secretary of State shall
ensure that such reports include a description of any instances or
patterns of practice that indicate that the extraction and
cross-border trade in columbite-tantalite, cassiterite, wolframite,
or gold has negatively affected human rights conditions or
supported specific human rights violations, sexual or gender-based
violence, or labor abuses in the eastern region of the Democratic
Republic of Congo, during the period covered by each report.
(f) Annual Organization for Economic Co-Operation and Development
Investment Committee Report- In preparing the United States' annual
report to the Organization for Economic Co-operation and
Development Investment Committee, the Secretary of State shall
include a description of efforts by the United States to ensure,
consistent with the Organization for Economic Co-operation and
Development Guidelines for Multinational Enterprises, that
enterprises under United States jurisdiction are exercising due
diligence to ensure that their purchases of minerals or metals are
not originating from mines and trading routes that are used to
finance or benefit illegal armed groups in the Democratic Republic
of Congo.
(g) Authorization of Appropriations- There is authorized to be
appropriated to the Secretary of State for fiscal year 2010 such
sums as may be necessary for the Secretary to carry out the
provisions of this section.
(h) Definitions- In this section:
(1) APPROPRIATE CONGRESSIONAL COMMITTEES- The term `appropriate
congressional committees' means-- (A) the Committee on
Appropriations, the Committee on Foreign Relations, and the
Committee on Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs of the Senate; and
(B) the Committee on Appropriations, the Committee on Foreign
Affairs, and the Committee on Financial Services of the House of
Representatives.
(2) HUMAN RIGHTS REPORTS- The term `Human Rights Reports' means all
reports submitted by the Secretary of State to Congress under
sections 116 and 502B of the Foreign Assistance Act of 1961 (22
U.S.C. 2151n and 2304).
SEC. 5. DISCLOSURE TO SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION OF
ACTIVITIES RELATING TO COLUMBITE-TANTALITE, CASSITERITE, AND
WOLFRAMITE INDUSTRIES.
[Amends Section 13 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 to
require disclosure to the SEC of the origin of imports of
columbite-tantalite, cassiterite, or worlframite]
AfricaFocus Bulletin is an independent electronic publication
providing reposted commentary and analysis on African issues, with
a particular focus on U.S. and international policies. AfricaFocus
Bulletin is edited by William Minter.
AfricaFocus Bulletin can be reached at [email protected]. Please
write to this address to subscribe or unsubscribe to the bulletin,
or to suggest material for inclusion. For more information about
reposted material, please contact directly the original source
mentioned. For a full archive and other resources, see
http://www.africafocus.org
|
