International Cases

1) Joe v. Nestle , Nestle USA, Inc. v. Doe et al., No. 19-416, 593 U.S. _(2021) (Nestle)

Case about : Human rights due diligence (Nestlé's liability for child slavery in cocoa supply chains,
insufficient 'domestic conduct' to invoke the Alien Tort Statute)

Brief Facts :

Petitioners Nestlé USA and Cargill are U. S.-based companies that purchase, process, and sell cocoa.
They did not own or operate farms in Ivory Coast. But they did buy cocoa from farms located there. They
also provided those farms with technical and financial resources—such as training, fertilizer, tools, and
cash—in exchange for the exclusive right to purchase cocoa. Respondents allege that they were enslaved
on some of those farms.1

Respondents sued Nestlé, Cargill, and other entities, contending that this arrangement aided and abetted
child slavery. Respondents argue that petitioners “knew or should have known” that the farms were
exploiting enslaved children yet continued to provide those farms with resources. App. 319. They further
contend that petitioners had economic leverage over the farms but failed to exercise it to eliminate child
slavery. And although the resource distribution and respondents’ injuries occurred outside the United
States, respondents contend that they can sue in federal court because petitioners allegedly made all major
operational decisions from within the United States.2

Summary :

On 17 June 2021, the United States Supreme Court reversed a Ninth Circuit decision which held Nestlé liable
for aiding and abetting child slavery under the Alien Tort Statute (ATS). The alleged forced labour in Ivory
Coast could not be sufficiently linked to Nestlé's conduct in the United States, a nexus required to invoke the
jurisdiction of federal courts under the ATS.

Aside from their primary finding, the Court debated the judicial ability to create a new cause of action under
the ATS, deliberating the remit of common law in present day America. The Court also discussed corporate
liability under the ATS. While not binding, five Justices concurred that immunity provided by a corporate
veil should not extend to the ATS, despite foreign policy concerns. The case was heard in conjunction with
Cargill, a privately held food corporation also registered in the United States. 3

1
https://www.law.cornell.edu/supremecourt/text/19-416
2
https://www.hrlc.org.au/human-rights-case-summaries/2021/8/30/nestl-v-doe-united-states-supreme-court-overturns-nestls-liability-for-child-
slavery-in-cocoa-supply-chains-insufficient-domestic-conduct-to-invoke-the-alien-tort-statute
3
https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/20pdf/19-416_i4dj.pdf
Analysis :

The majority’s decision in Nestle USA v. Doe is in line with this trend, as it seeks to set further limits on
the scope of the ATS, rejecting the possibility of plaintiffs relying on the ATS to pursue claims against
U.S. companies involving only limited conduct within the U.S.

it may be difficult to bring claims against U.S. companies for violations beyond “violation of safe
conducts, infringement of the rights of ambassadors and piracy”. However, the position asserted by the
minority, led by Justice Sotomayor, indicates that the door (to identifying causes of action beyond the
historical torts), while narrow, is not completely shut. Following Sosa and Justice Sotomayor’s reasoning,
the Court may still recognize new causes of action for the violations of specific, universal and obligatory
norms of international law.4

Principle behind child labour :

Federal law( The federal child labor provisions of the Fair Labor Standards Act of 1938 (FLSA) were
enacted to ensure that when young people work, the work is safe and does not jeopardize their health,
well-being or educational opportunities. These provisions also provide limited exemptions) For non-
agricultural jobs, children under 14 may not be employed, children between 14 and 16 may be employed
in allowed occupations during limited hours, and children between 16 and 17 may be employed for
unlimited hours in non-hazardous occupations. And Principle 5 states that businesses have the
responsibility to abolish of child labour.5,6

2. Rana Plaza Collapse (2013)

Case : The Rana Plaza tragedy was a catastrophic industrial disaster, and while there may have been
legal proceedings and investigations related to it.

4
https://www.allenovery.com/en-gb/global/news-and-insights/publications/nestle-v-doe-us-supreme-court-further-defines-scope-of-alien-tort-
statute
5
https://unglobalcompact.org/what-is-gc/mission/principles/principle-5
6
https://www.dol.gov/agencies/whd/child-labor
Brief facts : On April 24th, 2013 Rana Plaza, an eight story garment factory located in Savar (just outside
of Dhaka) collapsed killing one thousand one hundred and twenty-nine people and injuring over two
thousand. The collapse has been called the “world’s worst industrial accident in almost three decades.”
The building was owned by Md Sohel Rana, a significant figure in the governing Awami League.
Government documents released following the collapse reported that official permission had only been
obtained for six of the eight floors of the structure. Rana had also not received a permit to use the building
as a manufacturing complex. The two floors were constructed regardless of authorized approval and were
done so using substandard materials. The building was also situated, like most recent buildings in the
Dhaka region, on a former watercourse. Overcrowding and machine vibrations alongside illegal
construction and manufacturing created instability and ultimately circumstances for the collapse.

Summary :

The events of April 24, 2013 triggered swift — and yet, still belated — action from Bangladeshi
authorities. Almost 20 garment factories were shuttered within two weeks of the disaster. But it was clear,
as it had been before the collapse, that safety issues were endemic. Six months earlier, a major fire at the
Tazreen Fashions factory outside Dhaka had claimed at least 117 lives; seven years before that, in 2005,
the nine-story Spectrum factory had collapsed, killing 64 people.7

Fast-forward to today, and major garment factory disasters — of that scale, at least — have seemingly
been avoided. This is often credited to a groundbreaking agreement reached between brands, factories and
trade unions less than a month after Rana Plaza: the Accord on Fire and Building Safety in
Bangladesh .

Relatives of Bangladeshi workers who lost their lives in the Rana Plaza collapse gather with banners and
placards in Savar on June 29, 2013, at the site of Bangladesh's worst industrial disaster.

Signed at the time by over 200 brands, and applicable to any Bangladeshi factory or workshop supplying
them with garments, the legally binding commitment established an independent inspection program
spanning fire, electrical and building safety. Inspection findings are made publicly available. So too are
improvement plans for underperforming factories, with corrective action implemented using funds
committed by participating brands. The Accord has also introduced safety committees and complaint
mechanisms via which workers can raise concerns — anonymously if they so wish.8

7
https://thewire.in/south-asia/bangladesh-10-years-rana-plaza-fast-fashion
8
https://www.ilo.org/infostories/en-GB/Stories/Country-Focus/rana-plaza
Such are its successes that a Pakistani version of the Accord was announced last year and has been signed
by 49 brands and retailers , including Zara’s parent company Inditex.9

Analysis :

The global economy necessitates that capital move to places where the cost of production can be reduced
to a very low point. Sophisticated chains of production mean that many companies are unaware or unwilling to
acknowledge that.
In the aftermath of the disaster, more than 200 brands signed onto a legally binding agreement with trade
unions to investigate and address dangerous factory conditions in Bangladesh.

The Accord on Fire and Building Safety in Bangladesh, or the Bangladesh Accord, stood out in a number
of ways:

1. It established accountability in an industry that to this day remains largely self-regulated.

2. It required independent inspections, instead of brand- or factory-backed monitoring programmes.
3. It was transparent, publishing inspection results and progress on a quarterly basis.
4. It ensured collective action, pooling brands’ buying power and giving labour advocates a seat at
the table in driving change.
5. It required brands to make financial commitments to support improvements.
6. To be sure, the Accord had critics. For some brands, the binding agreement created too much
legal risk and required ceding too much control over their supply chains. Its remit was limited and
progress was slower than many labour advocates would have liked. Manufacturers said brands’
promises of financial support ultimately didn’t amount to much, and the internationally driven
initiative took on an awkward semi-regulatory role.10 11
Extent of liability : The systemic failure of government protection of human rights and lack of
respect towards workers’ right allows incident like Rana Plaza to continue to happen. Beyond the
famously low wages, unsafe working conditions and restrictions and repression of labour unions

9
https://edition.cnn.com/style/article/rana-plaza-garment-worker-rights-accord/index.html
10
Abuses ‘still rife’: 10 years on from Bangladesh’s Rana Plaza disaster , https://www.theguardian.com/world/2023/apr/24/10-
years-on-bangladesh-rana-plaza-disaster-safety-garment-workers-rights-pay

11
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2023/apr/24/10-years-on-bangladesh-rana-plaza-disaster-safety-garment-workers-rights-
pay
 plague the industry. The state has a duty to protect its citizen against human rights abuses by third
parties, including business enterprises, through regulation, policymaking, investigation and
enforcement. But policymakers are also part of this profit-making business and are strong
protectors of corruption mechanisms.12

As there was no significant liablity impact due to Rana’s political connection

3. WUC vs HMRC ( Judgment)

Neutral Citation Number: [2023] EWHC 88 (Admin)

Case Brief :

12
https://www.opendemocracy.net/en/opensecurity/reason-and-responsibility-rana-plaza-collapse/
On 20 January 2023, the High Court in London issued a historic judgment in relation to the World
Uyghur Congress’ (WUC) challenge to the UK government’s failure to investigate the importation of
cotton produced in China’s Xinjiang Uyghur Autonomous Region (Xinjiang). WUC’s concerns at the
heart of this litigation are well documented: that cotton exported out of China to the UK and elsewhere
is produced by forced labour in Xinjiang where the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights
has concluded that China committed “serious human rights violations” against Uyghur and “other
predominantly Muslim communities.” 13

To make its argument, the WUC’s case was constructed around two key legal themes.

1. The Defendants had failed to honour the provisions of the Foreign Prison-Made Goods Act 1897
(“FPMGA”). Section 1 FPGMA, broadly, prohibits the import of goods made wholly or partly in
foreign prisons.
2. The NCA had wrongly interpreted the Proceeds of Crime Act 2002 (“POCA”) when failing to
bring criminal investigations for money laundering into Xinjiang cotton imports.

Summary :

Case was lost by WUF

The World Uyghur Congress has said it is disappointed to have lost a legal challenge against UK
authorities for not launching a criminal investigation into the importation of cotton products manufactured
by forced labour in China’s Xinjiang province but would continue to fight for accountability.
The WUC took the home secretary, HM Revenue and Customs and the National Crime Agency
(NCA), to the high court, claiming an unlawful failure or refusal to investigate imports from
Xinjiang, allegedly home to 380 internment camps used to detain Uyghurs and people from other Muslim
minorities.
It said 85% of Chinese cotton was grown in the Xinjiang Uyghur Autonomous Region (XUAR) and the
“vast majority” was manufactured in facilities under “conditions of detention and forced labour”,
implicating UK companies that imported from certain Chinese firms.
14

13
https://www.judiciary.uk/wp-content/uploads/2023/01/World-Uyghur-Congress-v-HMRC-judgment-200123.pdf
14
https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-63390458
The two day hearing at the Royal Courts of Justice in October 2022 was a landmark event for many
reasons. It was the first time the Uyghur repression had been raised in a foreign court. In his judgment,
Dove J highlighted at the outset that the extensive evidence underlying our case in relation to the
mistreatment of the Uyghur people and the involvement of abuses in the production of cotton in [East
Turkistan] is not the subject of dispute by the Defendants. He concluded his judgment by emphasizing
that “[t]he outcome of the case does not in any way undermine the striking consensus in the evidence that
there are clear and widespread abuses in the cotton industry in [East Turkistan], involving human rights
violations and the exploitation of forced labour.”

The case was also the first time the Foreign Prison Made Goods Act 1897 was argued, and the first case
concerning the proceeds of human rights abuses as criminal property under the Proceeds of Crime Act
2002. The government’s lawyers accepted in open court that cotton produced by enslaved Uyghurs could
be the proceeds of crime – the dispute only concerned whether there was enough evidence to investigate.
Despite his findings on this particular challenge, Dove J reiterated that there may be other tools or
measures available to the government which they could use to tackle the concerns about the exploitation
and abuse of the Uyghur people in cotton production in East Turkistan.

Although the result is deeply disappointing, the case provided important vindication for the Uyghur
people that the government, and courts, of the UK do not dispute that they are the victims of an ongoing
criminal enterprise perpetrated by Chinese authorities. 15

Analysis

However, one concerning aspect of this judgment is the Court’s endorsement of the view that as long as
UK companies pay market value for slave-labour cotton, they could not be prosecuted for acquiring it
under s.329 of the Proceeds of Crime Act. Given its clear implications for the trade in the products of
atrocity crimes, we are considering whether that is legally correct or whether an appeal might be
appropriate

4) Lungowe and Ors. v Vedanta Resources Plc and Konkola Copper Mines Plc [2017] EWCA Civ 1528

Case description :
15
https://www.reuters.com/world/uyghur-rights-group-fail-legal-challenge-against-uk-government-2023-01-20/
#:~:text=The%20World%20Uyghur%20Congress%20(WUC,the%20WUC's%20grounds%20of%20challenge.
 1) the claimants’ pleaded a real triable issue against Vedanta. This issue very much boiled down to
the question of whether a parent company may owe a duty of care to persons harmed by the
actions or omissions of its foreign subsidiary.
2) The Implications of the UK Supreme Court's Decision in Vedanta for the Management of Human
Rights Risk in Overseas Operations and Supply Chain

Summary :

Residents of the Zambian city of Chingola brought civil proceedings against Vedanta Resources Plc
(Vedanta), a UK incorporated parent company, and Konkola Copper Mines Plc (KCM), its Zambian
subsidiary, claiming that waste discharged from the Nchanga copper mine - owned and operated by KCM
- had polluted the local waterways, causing personal injury to the local residents, as well as damage to
property and loss of income. The claims are founded in negligence, although the allegations against the
subsidiary also relate to breaches of applicable Zambian environmental laws.

In 2015, the High Court held that the claimants could bring their case in England, despite the fact that the
alleged tort and harm occurred in Zambia, where both the claimants and KCM are domiciled. The
defendants appealed this decision on the grounds that: (a) the English courts do not have jurisdiction to
hear the claims against Vedanta; and (b) that the appropriate place to bring the claims against KCM is
Zambia. Vedanta agreed that it would submit to the jurisdiction of the Zambian courts if the application
succeeded.

On 13 October 2017, the majority of the Court of Appeal dismissed the defendants’ appeal and held that
the claimants’ case could proceed before the English courts.

The Court of Appeal endorsed the High Court’s judgment that parallel proceedings against the UK
company in the English courts and the Zambian company in the Zambian courts would be unthinkable,
making England and Wales the proper place for the claims against both the defendants (given the
similarity of facts and legal principles at issue).

The Court also accepted the claimants’ argument that they were precluded from bringing the claims in
Zambia because of issues with access to justice in the Zambian justice system. When dealing with this
point, the Court commented that the evidence presented in the first instance proceedings against the
Zambian justice system was so “overwhelming” that it was almost certain that the claimants would be
unable to obtain justice in the Zambian courts.
Analysis :

Vedanta highlights the need for multinational companies to be aware of the possibility that non-UK
claimants may be able to bring claims against them in the English courts, as well as the possibility that the
scope of potential claimants will be widened in the future to communities affected by the operations of a
local subsidiary.

Given the human rights dimension of Vedanta, both in relation to the nature of the damage and the access
to justice arguments, Companies should take note of this trend and pre-emptively implement measures to
ensure that human rights are respected and protected throughout its operations. This involves
implementing relevant policies, carrying out thorough human rights due diligence, providing bespoke
training and continuing to exercise suitable oversight to ensure that any human rights impacts are
effectively managed.

Liability : business liability for human rights violations, environmental damage and the duty of care owed
by a parent companyliability for human rights violations, environmental damage and the duty of care
owed by a parent company

Negligence – A duty is imposed on a person by law to act with care towards others

5. Tesco-Thailand Scam
Case Brief : Tesco and social audit firm Intertek are facing a lawsuit brought by 130 Burmese workers
who made F&F jeans for Tesco in Thailand VK Garment workers say they were trapped in forced labour
conditions, working 99-hour weeks for illegally low pay, while auditors failed to report abuses workers
flagged. Workers are suing Tesco and Intertek for negligence and unjust enrichment in a case bought by
the law firm Leigh Day.16

Summary :

The 130 Burmese former workers at VK Garments (VKG) who are taking legal action in England against
Tesco are part of a bigger trend to take on the brands making profits from their labour.

Workers at VKG sewed F&F jeans to supply to the Thai branch of Tesco’s business from 2017 to 2020.
They brought a case in Thailand’s labour court and in September this year the factory was ordered to pay
out severance and notice pay. The workers are also seeking alleged unpaid wages but they do not have
much hope that the factory will be made to pay out.17

Alongside Starbucks, the Walt Disney Company and NBC Universal, Tesco paid compensation in 2020 to
Burmese workers at another garment factory that did not pay minimum wage after some blew the whistle
to the Thomson Reuters Foundation. In that case, a Thai court ordered 26 Burmese workers be given
$110,000 (£90,400) compensation from the factory owner. When the factory owner could not pay the full
amount, the rest of the bill was instead picked up by Tesco and others.18

Analysis :

The alleged treatment of vulnerable migrant workers in the way they have described to us is totally
contrary to the ethical image that Tesco seeks to portray in the UK – a company of this size should be
taking steps to ensure that workers producing their products are not mistreated,” says Oliver Holland,
partner at Leigh Day. “The social auditing industry is seriously broken and the garment industry’s
reliance on social auditors like Intertek should end now and they should start to take greater
responsibility for their supply chains to ensure endemic issues like forced labour are wiped out.”

Domestic Cases

16
https://www.theguardian.com/business/2022/dec/18/workers-in-thailand-who-made-ff-jeans-for-tesco-trapped-in-effective-
forced-labour
17
https://www.just-style.com/news/tesco-intertek-face-lawsuit-over-garment-worker-negligence/?cf-view
18
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2022/dec/19/how-big-brands-like-tesco-are-drawn-to-wild-west-of-global-supply-chain
1) M.C. Mehta v State of Tamil Nadu and others, Sivakassi firework case

Citation : AIR 1997 SC 699

Case description :

1. Child labour remains prevalent in the country. The case, M.C. Mehta v. State of Tamil Nadu and
others is a landmark case that gives directions on the ways to curb Child labour in the country.
2. Child labour is a gruesome and highly prevalent reality in our country. Our constitution makers had
deployed Article 24 (Prohibition of employment of children in factories, etc

Case Summary :
Sivakasi, a town in the state of Tamil Nadu (hereinafter referred to as the State) was one of the worst-hit
towns in terms of child labour in the country. M.C. Mehta concerned by the unbearable state of child
labour in the town filed a petition under Article 32 of the Indian Constitution. He contended that the
employment of children in hazardous match stick factories was morally preposterous and constitutionally
invalid. The respondent government did not oppose the claims and submitted ideas to deplete the
problem. Therefore, the court issued certain directions suggesting means to improve the lives of the
affected children. However, subsequent to this order an accident occurred in one of Sivakasi’s fireworks
factories. The court took suo moto cognizance of this incident.

Held :
The court held that Child labour was not an issue in Sivakasi alone. Therefore, it should be treated as a
national issue. It observed that the rights of children were protected under Articles 24, 39(e) and 9(f), 41,
and 47 of the Indian Constitution. These articles mainly provided for the growth and development of a
child by banning child labour, providing free and compulsory education to children, providing a dignified
standard of living to the children, etc. Domestic laws such as the Apprentices Act, Beedi and Cigar
Workers Conditions of Employment Act, Child Labour (Prohibition and Regulation) Act also protected
such rights. It was also noted that India ratified the Convention on the Rights of the Child, which not only
protects the child’s civil and political right but also extends protection to child’s economic, social, cultural
and humanitarian rights[12].
The court took into cognizance the various causes of the perpetual existence of Child labour in India and
cited various articles such as Child Labour in India by Nazir Ahmad Shah, Causes of the exploitation of
child labour in India by Dr. Amar Singh and Raghuvinder Singh. The findings of Indian Child Labour by
Dr. J.C. Kulshreshtha were also pointed out, which revealed the main causes of failure as
(1) poverty; (2) low wages of the adult; (3) unemployment; (4) absence of schemes for family allowance;
(5) migration to urban areas; (6) large families; (7) children being cheaply available; (8) non-existence of
provisions for compulsory education; (9) illiteracy and ignorance of parents; and (10) traditional attitudes.

The court, however, concluded that the main cause was the deteriorating financial conditions of the
family which compelled the child to work and earn. It was held that the growth and development of the
child were necessary to fulfil the intention of the legislation. Therefore, the formation of a Child Labour
Rehabilitation cum Welfare Fund (hereinafter referred to as The Fund) was ordered. Any person
contravening the provisions of the aforementioned legislation, in other words, any person employing a
child into hazardous labour would have to pay a sum of Rs. 20,000, which shall be deposited in The Fund.
The amount deposited shall be used for the growth and development of the child.

As an alternative to curb the menace, the court ordered the government to see that an adult member of the
family in which a child is employed in hazardous jobs gets a job, in lieu of the child. The employed shall
have to in return ensure that the child receives full-time education and is spared from the exertions of
working in a hazardous place. Per contra, the court noted that the attainment of employment of these
adults might prove to be a burden on the state. Therefore, it held that if the government is not able to
provide an adult with a job, it must contribute Rs. 5000 to The Fund for each child employed in a factory
or mine or other hazardous employment.

Analysis :
Supreme Court recognised that Sivakasi had ceased to be the only centre employing child labour; the
malady was no longer confined to that place. The court also recognised that child labour was an all-
pervasive national problem in India even after 50 years of independence – and despite the enactment of
various legislations. Further, the Supreme Court recognised poverty as a basic cause for child labour [17].
The court observed that until an alternative income was assured to the family, child labour could never be
effectively tackled

2) People’s Union for Democratic Rights and Others Vs.: Union of India & Others
Citation : AIR 1982 SC 1473
Case Description : Poor work condition
Case Summary : In this case there was a complaint of a violation of Article 24 of the constitution (which
prohibits employing children below the age of 14 years in hazardous employment) on behalf of child
labourers employed in construction work in Delhi. Also, the labourers who worked on the ASIAD-82 sites
both on stadia and the infrastructure like flyovers and hotels, were recruited by agents of construction
contractors from backward villages of Orissa, Bihar, West Bengal, Madhya Pradesh, Andhra Pradesh and
Rajasthan. Working at a feverish pace, often far beyond the working hours fixed by laws without the
minimum daily wages due to them living in hovels, their children dying of malnutrition and they
themselves frequently becoming victims of accidents, these workers were forced to complete the ASIAD
projects in time by November 19. The terrible working and living conditions to which these workers were
subjected to were first brought to public notice by a fact-finding team of the People’s Union for
Democratic Rights (PUDR) which visited some of the major sites in July and August 1981 and
interviewed the workers as well as their employers.
The People’s Union for Democratic Rights followed this up by filing a writ petition before the Supreme
Court on November 16, 1981, by way of PIL in order to issue observance of the provisions of various
labour laws in relation to the workers employed in the construction work of the ASIAD-82 projects.
Admitting the writ petition on May 1982, Justice P.N. Bhagwati and Justice Baharul Islam directed the
Union Government, the Delhi Development Authority and the Delhi Administration – the three concerns
which had appointed the contractors for the ASIAD construction work to ensure the payment of minimum
wages and provision of other facilities to the workers under the various laws. The judges also appointed
three ombudsmen (experienced persons authorized to inquire into and pronounce upon grievances of
citizens against public authorities) – the first time in the judicial history of India – for protecting the
interests of the workers and ensuring the observance of the laws. They were requested to visit the major
sites of the construction work and submit weekly reports to the Supreme Court relating to cases of
violation of the laws.

Held : A wider meaning has also been given to the provisions of Article 21, 17, 23 of the Constitution so
as to cover the cases of Non-payment or less payment of wages to the workers which they are entitled
under the provisions of law. The Supreme Court considered the scope and ambit of Article 23 in detail.
The Court held that the scope of Article 23 is wide and unlimited and strikes at “traffic in human beings”
and “beggar and other forms of forced labour” wherever they are found. It is not merely “beggar” which
is prohibited by Article 23 but also all other forms of forced labour. This Article strikes at forced labour in
whatever form it may manifest itself, because it is violative of human dignity and contrary to basic human
values. And therefore, strikes to violate Article 21 also.

Analysis :
It’s the solemn constitutional responsibility of the government and its agencies to see that the various laws
are properly implemented, not only by it but also by private persons or non-governmental establishments.
The Supreme Court used expressions “bonded labour” and “forced labour” in Article 21 to “right to live
with human dignity”. The rights and benefits guaranteed to the labourers under various labour laws were
made parts of basic Human Dignity and raised to the status of Fundamental Rights.

3) Mica Mining and child labour (article )

Description : However, according to the International Labor Organization (ILO), mining operations such
as those involving mica are among the "worst forms of child labor," with the youngest children just four
years old. Hundreds of them have not survived the work in recent years, and many have been buried. In
fact, on February 8 of this year in Tisri, a 14-year-old girl died after a mine collapsed. "Most of the cases
don't even come to light; they are not reported or have been covered up," says Barbara Küppers of the
children's charity "Terre des hommes."19

Analysis : The survey was conducted by the National Commission for Protection of Child Rights
(NCPCR) after a report by Terre Des Hommes, an international development agency working in India,
revealed last year that more than 22,000 children are employed as child labourers in the mica mining
areas of Jharkhand and Bihar.
In its survey, the NCPCR said it has observed that a section of children in the mica mining areas are
deprived of opportunities and have started working as labourers to supplement their family income.
The survey was conducted in the districts of Koderma and Giridih in Jharkhand and Nawada district in
Bihar.
“As per the survey, there are 4,545 children in the age group of six to 14 years in the area of Jharkhand
reported as not attending school,” the NCPCR said. The survey on ‘education & well-being of children in
mica mining areas of Jharkhand and Bihar’ found that 649 children in the same age group were reported
as not attending school in Nawada district of Bihar. The reasons for not attending school included lack of
aspiration, lack of interest and also cases of collecting mica scraps, according to the survey.
It also found that children in the age group of six to 14 years in 45 habitations of Koderma, 40 habitations
of Giridih and 15 habitations of Nawada go for mica scraps collection. Officials say selling mica scraps is
the main means of livelihood for many families in these areas. “Several families do not see the benefit of
sending their children to schools and instead prefer them working in collecting and selling mica scraps,”
an official said. India is one of the world’s largest producers of mica, with Jharkhand and Bihar being the
main mica producing states in the country. Mica is used in various sectors, including buildings and
electronics, and even in cosmetics and paint production.
The commission said the supply chain of the mica mining and industry should be be made free of child
labour.
“No child to be engaged in any part of the mica mining process and collecting scraps. NGOs/development
agencies should work with the local and district administration as well as with the industries to chalk out
a strategy to make the supply chain of mica mining free of child labour,” the NCPCR said. 20

4) Sterelite copper Case

The Tamil Nadu Pollution Control Board vs. Sterlite Industries
Case description :

19
https://www.business-humanrights.org/en/latest-news/india-significantly-more-illegal-mica-mines-than-
suspected/
20
https://www.hindustantimes.com/education/around-5-000-children-abandon-education-in-mica-mines-of-
jharkhand-and-bihar-some-now-child-labourers-survey/story-zRP5RVQq7QnsCnr1AnwmPO.html
 The case explains the events that led to the closure of the Sterlite Copper (Sterlite) plant in Thoothukudi in the
Indian state of Tamil Nadu. Massive protests by anti-Sterlite activists against the alleged environmental
hazards caused by the Sterlite plant culminated in the death of ten people in police firing and eventually led to
the Tamil Nadu state government shutting down the Sterlite plant. The case highlights the flouting of
environmental rules and regulations by Sterlite. The impact of the environmental pollution caused by the
Sterlite plant on air, water, and land is explained with the help of various reports and studies conducted by
environmental agencies. The views and opinions of the general public, industry observers, business analysts,
and environmental agencies are presented in the case. The case also points out to the fact that Sterlite was
contributing to the development of the area by generating employment opportunities and providing a
livelihood to thousands of people. Sterlite was catering to 36 percent of the domestic copper requirements of
the country. There were scores of local and allied industries dependent on the copper produced by Sterlite. The
impact of the closure of the plant on the development of the area and the allied industries is also discussed.

1) the importance of ‘Environmental Ethics’ ‘business ethics’ in an organization.

2) the importance of stakeholder management in their Supply chain

Case Summary : In the early hours of March 23, 2013, a large SO2 leak from the company’s sulphuric acid
plant affected thousands of residents in Thoothukudi. This was the second time it was being shut down
for a major leak of SO2; the first one, in 1997, sent more than 20 young women from a neighbouring
dried flower packaging factory to the hospital. Thoothukudi residents still say Sterlite was responsible for
that leak. But the company managed to convince the district administration and the Tamil Nadu Pollution
Control Board (TNPCB) otherwise.

The 2013 leak was different. The two sulphuric acid plants in the factory complex had real-time online
SO2 emissions monitors. On that fateful winter morning, the monitor atop a chimney of one of the plants
recorded SO2 levels in excess of the meters’ upper limits. TNPCB ordered to shut down the 400,000-
tonne-a-year smelter complex. But Vedanta reopened it on the strength of a favourable order from the
New Delhi bench of the National Green Tribunal.

In 2019, deciding on an appeal filed by the Tamil Nadu authorities against the order, the Supreme Court
dismissed the tribunal’s judgement saying it had no jurisdiction over the matter, and directed Sterlite to
appeal to the Madras high court instead.

The second set of orders that went against Sterlite was in the appeals filed by the company in 2019,
challenging several orders of the TNPCB and the Government of Tamil Nadu issued between April and
May 2018, which led to the factory’s closure. Amidst a relentless public campaign targeting the company
for its pollution, and the state for colluding with the polluter, TNPCB cited the company’s failure to
comply with license conditions and refused to renew its license to operate on April 9, 2018.
On May 28, 2018, the Government of Tamil Nadu took a policy decision to shut the plant, and
subsequently the factory was locked and sealed. This was the fifth time the company was being shut for
violating the law.21

Analysis :
While the exports have significantly fallen from FY 2018- 2019 onwards, the imports have risen sharply
to cater to the domestic demand. With the Copper Plant contributing close to 40 percent to the copper
production in India, its closure has amounted to significant losses in terms of Foreign Exchange (Forex),
cutting down the country’s net production by 46.1 percent.

But Environment cant be compromise on the profit making industry .

21
https://www.livelaw.in/pdf_upload/pdf_upload-380108.pdf