The Kimberley Process is the international certification scheme established to prevent rough diamonds from being used to finance wars by rebel movements against legitimate governments. It came into formal operation on 1 January 2003 following negotiations that began in May 2000 in Kimberley, South Africa. As of the mid-2020s the scheme has 60 participating entities, jointly representing approximately 85 of the 195 member states of the United Nations, but covering well over 99 per cent of global rough diamond production and trade.

Scope and definition

The Kimberley Process applies to rough diamonds only, defined under harmonised tariff codes 7102.10, 7102.21, and 7102.31. It does not apply to polished diamonds, to lab-grown diamonds, or to other gem materials. The scheme defines conflict diamonds narrowly, as rough diamonds used by rebel movements to finance armed conflict aimed at undermining legitimate governments. The narrowness of this definition is the source of much of the criticism that the scheme has received.

How the certification works

Rough diamonds traded between Kimberley Process participants must be accompanied by a Kimberley Process Certificate issued by the exporting country's designated authority. The certificate states the country of origin or country of last export, the harmonised tariff code, the carat weight, and the value, along with shipper and consignee details. Participants are obligated to refuse imports of rough diamonds without a valid certificate from a participating country, and to refuse exports to non-participating countries. National implementation legislation gives effect to these obligations.

Governance

The Kimberley Process operates by consensus among participating states, with the chairmanship rotating annually among them. Working groups handle monitoring, statistics, diamond experts, and special concerns. The World Diamond Council represents the diamond industry within the scheme, and a coalition of civil-society organisations, including the Diamond Development Initiative and various human-rights groups, formerly held observer status, although Global Witness withdrew in 2011.

Strengths and limitations

The scheme has succeeded in significantly reducing the trade of diamonds funding the wars in Sierra Leone, Angola, Liberia, and the Democratic Republic of the Congo that motivated its creation. It has established universal traceable certification of rough-diamond shipments. It is widely cited as a model of public-private cooperation among states, industry, and civil society.

The principal limitations are well documented. The narrow definition of conflict diamonds excludes diamonds mined under conditions of human-rights abuse by state actors, by private military forces, or by abusive private mining operators. The scheme does not address environmental harm, child labour, worker safety, or community displacement. It does not cover polished diamonds or finished jewellery. The consensus-based governance allows participants to block reform proposals, which has prevented expansion of the conflict-diamond definition despite repeated proposals.

Specific cases of contention

Several cases have illustrated the limitations of the scheme. Diamonds from the Marange field in Zimbabwe were the subject of significant disagreement between 2008 and 2011, with civil-society organisations arguing that severe human-rights abuses by Zimbabwean security forces should disqualify Marange diamonds while several Kimberley Process participants ruled them compliant. The case contributed to Global Witness's withdrawal in 2011. Diamonds from the Central African Republic were subject to a Kimberley Process embargo following a 2013 coup, partially lifted in stages from 2016 to 2019.

Reform efforts

Reform discussions within the Kimberley Process have continued for over a decade, with proposals to expand the conflict-diamond definition, to strengthen the monitoring framework, and to address human-rights and environmental concerns. As of the mid-2020s these reforms have not been adopted, although individual participants and the industry have moved beyond the Kimberley Process minimum through frameworks such as the Responsible Jewellery Council Code of Practices, the OECD Due Diligence Guidance, and various traceability platforms.

Significance for the trade

For the working trade the Kimberley Process is the legal floor for rough-diamond import and export across nearly all jurisdictions. Compliance is mandatory and routine. Beyond compliance, however, no serious diamond business now treats Kimberley Process certification as a sufficient ethical supply-chain credential. The scheme is the necessary but not sufficient first step in any responsible-sourcing programme.