Such practices go along with allegations of arbitrary detention, torture, forced sterilization and rape in facilities China calls vocational schools but are widely considered detention centers, the report added. The details confirm findings from past exposés by newspapers and rights groups.
Since details of such abuses came to light in recent years, some brands have vowed to avoid sourcing cotton from Xinjiang, though others have said they will instead rely on more careful controls.
In response to questions, Ryohin Keikaku, which makes the Muji line of clothing and home products, said it conducts third-party audits every year on its used cotton and has not identified any “material violations” so far, reiterating a statement he made. last year. A spokesman said the company would terminate business relations if such violations were found.
Muji remains one of the biggest brands outside of China that has not distanced itself from Xinjiang cotton, with some of its clothing labels clearly labeling its material as originating from the region.
Muji’s foreign customer base is mainly Chinese. Of the approximately 600 stores the brand has outside its home country of Japan, over 270 of them are in China.
A 2020 report by an Australian think tank Strategic Policy Institute linked Muji, along with over 80 other brands internationally, to suppliers who may have been part of labor transfer schemes in the Xinjiang region.
Hugo Boss, a German clothing brand, told Eco-Business that it does not source “ready-to-wear from the Xinjiang region of China” and that it does not tolerate forced labor and modern slavery.
Last year, the Chinese branch of Hugo Boss said on social media that it buys and supports Xinjiang cotton. The firm later said the post was unauthorized and released a statement saying it did not buy goods from Xinjiang “from direct suppliers”.
A spokesman for Hugo Boss said it expects partners throughout its supply chain to respect its ethical standards, but did not respond to a question about whether the firm would consider a blanket ban on cotton and materials from Xinjiang in response to the report. the UN.
Fila of Korea and Asics of Japan did not respond to questions. Both firms have no policies to ban materials from Xinjiang throughout its supply chains, nor have they issued statements in response to the UN report.
“
Businesses must conduct rigorous human rights risk assessments for all goods originating in China, not just Xinjiang.
Justine Nolan, Professor, University of New South Wales
Enforcing a ban on Xinjiang cotton has proven challenging given the complexity of the commodity’s supply chain. Some researchers think there may be a concerted effort to further obfuscate the data by sending raw materials to middlemen in nearby countries. German scientists recently found traces of Xinjiang cotton through molecular studies in clothing made by Adidas, Puma and Hugo Boss.
Professor Justine Nolan, a human rights expert at the University of New South Wales, pointed out that the UN report said workers from Xinjiang could be forcibly relocated to factories in other parts of China. This makes it more difficult for firms to avoid being associated with forced labour.
The UN report said businesses should increase their human rights due diligence and report their findings. Firms in the security industry should consider whether their products could contribute to abuses in Xinjiang, he added.
“Businesses should conduct rigorous human rights risk assessments on all goods coming out of China, not just Xinjiang,” Nolan said.
“Until there is wider access and independent verification of working conditions in Xinjiang, business must now assume there is a rebuttable presumption that their supply chains are tainted with modern slavery,” she added.
End Uyghur Forced Labor, a network of civil society and trade groups, said countries should ban imports of products made with Uyghur forced labor.
“Given the documented abuses, this can only be achieved by ending business relationships with companies linked to the Uighur Region and the forced labor system,” said Joanna Ewart-James, executive director of the anti-slavery group Freedom United. a member of End Uighur. Forced labor.
The group added that the UN report itself has shown that “credible due diligence is impossible” in the region.
In June, the United States began banning imports involving Xinjiang groups it said contributed to forced labor activities. The ban has resulted in blockades on textiles and solar panels. Ending Forced Uyghur Labor said companies should not re-export goods that are denied entry to the US.
Flak drawing
Foreign brands have drawn the ire of Chinese consumers for bypassing Xinjiang labor and materials in the past.
Swedish chain H&M grabbed headlines early last year when Chinese celebrities and e-commerce firms cut ties with the brand over a pledge to stop buying Xinjiang cotton. A popular boycott caused quarterly sales to drop more than 23 percent last May, and the brand was only re-listed on Tmall, China’s largest online marketplace, last month.
Other brands such as Nike and Burberry also faced criticism for its public statements in Xinjiang.
The non-profit initiative Better Cotton, which certifies environmental and social standards in the commodity, also found itself in hot water in 2020 due to the suspension of its licensing in Xinjiang due to allegations of abuse in the region. Last year, the group’s Shanghai office said it found no evidence of forced labor in Xinjiang.
The Better Cotton Initiative did not respond to questions from Eco-Business by the time of publication.
China has issued a response saying it firmly opposes the release of the UN report. She reiterated her stance that she is fighting “rampant” terrorism and extremism in the Xinjiang region and that its vocational centers are not concentration camps.
In addition to cotton, Xinjiang is rich in energy resources such as coal, gas and lithium – a key mineral for electric vehicle batteries.
