🌱 What is the case about?
The case is being brought by Tanzanian human rights claimants at the High Court in London. It was filed by the law firm Leigh Day “on behalf of the families of two artisanal miners who were killed by security forces in 2019”. The miners were killed “while prospecting for gold” at a mine in Tanzania. At the time of their deaths, they were both 23 years old.
🌱 What human rights abuses are alleged?
The claimants allege that there have been human rights abuses at the North Mara Gold Mine in Tanzania. They say the mine in question has been “associated with a widely reported pattern of systematic human rights abuses over many years”. They also say that serious human rights abuses occurred at the time of the miners’ deaths and that these abuses continue to today. The mine is “majority-owned by [the] Canadian multinational Barrick Gold Corporation” and since 2013, the mined gold “is refined by MMTC-PAMP, a Swiss-Indian refiner”.
🌱 What is the role of social certifications?
The case has been brought against the London Bullion Market Association (LBMA), who have accredited MMTC-PAMP since 2014. As a consequence, the claimants allege that LBMA has wrongly certified gold from the mine “as free from serious human rights abuses”. They also hold that LBMA and the mine should have taken action “to put a stop to the human rights abuses”. They argue that “had LBMA enforced its own responsible sourcing programme properly”, the two miners would still be alive. Barrick Gold and LBMA both deny these allegations.
🌱 What certification is the case about?
LBMA supervises the London bullion market for gold. This is the world’s largest over-the-counter wholesale gold trading market. Each week, approximately US$230 billion in gold is traded on this market. All gold bars traded here have to be “produced by a refiner who is accredited by the LBMA as being compliant with their Responsible Sourcing Programme”. This program “was established to ensure that [the] gold [...] is untainted by serious human rights abuses”.
🌱 Why is this significant?
While the use of ESG certifications and supply chain due diligence credentials by companies has become more widespread over the past few years, these often lack public oversight. This is now “the first time in the UK that human rights claimants [are suing] an industry certification body for an alleged breach of a duty of care owed to them”. In line with this, the case openly questions corporate claims about “responsible” and “ethical” mineral sourcing. It puts a direct spotlight on “industry certification schemes which claim to maintain environmental and human rights standards”. In a hearing held on 20 January 2025, the judge scheduled a four-week trial for the case. It is now scheduled to start at the High Court on the first available date after 29 June 2026.
Read more about the case here:
- https://www.solicitorsjournal.com/sjarticle/trial-of-london-gold-body