Loose boundaries of restriction and control, false paperwork and the scheme’s narrow focus enabled blood diamonds to be smuggled into international diamond supply. As per the Kimberley Process’ definition, “conflict diamonds” are those that are used by rebel groups to fund wars. This narrow definition allowed for a big loophole. If the diamonds have not been used in any direct funding of wars, they can be deemed as “conflict free”, even if they were involved in other injustices like bloodshed, child labor, sexual violence and harm to the environment. The Kimberley Process may have been a temporary “fix” for buyers and consumers to have a clear conscience, but the truth had to be exposed. After all, no one would want their diamond engagement ring or timeless piece of jewelry to be associated with crime, conflict and torture.
The big question remains: when would the standards of the diamond industry be raised? When would diamond traders and suppliers be held accountable? Beyond the fact that the Kimberley Process is not full proof in ensuring that a diamond is actually completely “conflict free”, the biggest problem is that the terms “blood diamond” and “conflict diamonds” have not been defined or explained to their entire extent. Because of this, it gives diamond traders and executives the flexibility to misconstrue the truth, by withholding extra information. Or, they themselves do not have detailed information on the origins of the diamonds. More often than not, executives assure consumers that they would never sell blood diamonds, and declare that their diamonds have been certified by the Kimberley Process as conflict free. But this isn’t enough. It leaves big gaps in the trade, and allows for diamonds associated with crime to enter the pool of diamond supply in the industry, without much resistance or control.
The Kimberley Process has many flaws, resulting in blood diamonds continuing to be a very real
to the diamond industry.
Some of its major drawbacks include: