An Amnesty International report has revealed that electric vehicle (EV) giants including Hyundai and Mitsubishi Motors have grossly violated human rights, particularly in countries such as the Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC) and Chile. They also have a track record of mistreating various indigenous communities across the globe, it said.
The report—Recharge for Rights—scores 13 major EV manufacturers based on their due diligence policies and self-reported practices. German luxury brand Mercedes-Benz has scored the highest, but only with a meagre 51 out of 90. At the other end is Mitsubishi with 13 points and the Chinese BYD with 11 points.
“While some progress was made, across the board, the scores were a massive disappointment. BYD, one of the largest and fastest growing electric vehicle companies, ranked at the bottom of our assessment. Its disclosures show a serious lack of transparency on human rights diligence in its battery supply chains,” Amnesty International general secretary Agnès Callamard said in a press release.
The companies were evaluated based on human rights policy and commitments; identification and assessment; cessation, prevention and mitigation of adverse impacts; monitoring; reporting, and remediation.
These broad concerns are further broken down into 15 criteria, based on which a score card has been provided for each of the 13 companies investigated by Amnesty.
What stands out starkly in the report, among several distressing issues, is the unequal distribution of benefits in the move to EVs, inspired by climate change action. While countries in the global north work towards reducing emissions and carbon footprints, the price is paid heavily by resource-rich, economically poor countries. The report highlights why climate action needs to be a social justice concern as well an environmental one.
How these 13 companies have scored
The scoring system used in the report ranges from 0 to 6, for each criteria adding up to a total of 90 points. The report investigates Geely Auto, Nissan, Renault, General Motors, Ford, BMW, Volkswagen (VW) Group, Stellantis, Tesla and Mercedes-Benz, apart from BYD, Mitsubishi and Hyundai.
The three worst-performing companies – Hyundai, BYD and Mitsubishi – all have scored zeros for most criteria. When it comes to Human Rights Policy and Commitments, however, Hyundai and Mitsubishi have managed to score 6, while BYD scored 3. Scoring 6 points simply implies the existence of a human rights policy and not actual real-life impacts. BYD, for example, only brought in a human rights policy this year.
With regard to Commitment to Respect Indigenous Peoples’ Rights, all three companies scored 0. The highest score achieved by any of the 13 companies in this criteria is only a 3. These companies are Renault, Ford, Stellantis, Tesla and Mercedes-Benz. Further, neither Mitsubishi, Hyundai nor BYD include in their policies, ‘free, prior and informed consent’ (FPIC)— a human rights norm which is required to be met regarding projects that could affect the lands, territories and resources of Indigenous communities.
In terms of risk mitigation, again the highest score held is 3: Ford, BMW, VW Group, Tesla and Mercedes-Benz. Both BYD and Mitsubishi scored 0 and Hyundai scored 1. BYD has not provided any information on measures to decrease risks of human rights violations. Neither has it produced evidence to show that it holds anyone accountable for violations down the supply chain. Mercedes-Benz has on the other hand has claimed in public reports that it conducts risk assessments among its tier-1 suppliers i.e. suppliers who are directly contracted by a company. However, Amnesty notes that evidence of the company cutting ties with suppliers who are in violation of human rights norms is limited.
Remediation is another criteria in which companies have scored poorly across the board. These are measures that a company has taken to rectify damages caused by it. Amnesty says these include “apologies, restitution, rehabilitation, financial or non-financial compensation, and measures to prevent future adverse impacts.”
Both BYD and Mitsubishi scored 0, while Hyundai scored 1. Mercedes-Benz also scored 1 in this criteria, with only Stellantis and Tesla scoring a 3.
BYD has provided no public documentation of any remediation measures. Hyundai has claimed that it has a process for remediation but has not provided examples. Mercedes-Benz, according to Amnesty, says that it requires suppliers to remedy environmental and human rights violations. It has not publicised any such actions taken in its EV battery supply chain. Similarly Mitsubishi has also not provided information on remediation measures taken in its supply chain either.
How much have each of these companies profited from its total sales including EVs? Mitsubishi reported revenues of 17.5 billion USD in 2023. In the same year, Mercedes Benz earned a revenue of 167 billion USD; Hyundai earned 128 billion USD and BYD made 84.8 billion USD and reported sales of more than 3 million electric and hybrid vehicles.
Climate change action a must, but not at a human cost
Amnesty points out the flaws in climate change action, particularly in the global north, at the expense of poorer countries such as the DRC, Chile, Argentina, Bolivia, Indonesia and the Philippines. The rush to switch from conventional fossil fuels comes at the cost of gross violations, threatening “to deepen the well documented human rights abuses rampant across the mining sector”, the report says. The violations run along the supply chain.
Standard EV batteries are lithium-ion based. These contain minerals such as cobalt, copper, nickel and as mentioned, lithium. According to the Amnesty report that quotes data from the International Energy Agency, demands for these metals are expected to increase nine-fold by 2035. This will require at least 300 more mines, pushing the estimated global value of these minerals to over 400 billion USD. But here’s the catch: ‘host countries’ as the countries from which such raw materials are actually extracted are called, will not share in these profits. Instead what these countries get are environmental damage, pollution, dangerous working conditions and evictions.
Take the DRC for example. Amnesty highlights that the DRC accounts for 70% of the global cobalt production and has the seventh largest copper reserves in the world. Rather than being able to profit from such resource richness, both children and adults have been found, in 2016, to be working in hazardous hand-dug cobalt mines. Matters only worsened by 2023. Large-scale mining in and around Kolwezi in the province of Lualaba had evicted people from their homes and farmlands, leading to this region being termed “sacrifice zones” by Amnesty.
The ‘Lithium Triangle’–Argentina, Bolivia and Chile has been hit by a “lithium gold rush”, as Reuters reported earlier this year. According to Reuters, these three countries together hold 85% of the world’s lithium reserves. With reference to this report, Amnesty adds that the rush to mine lithium from these three countries disturbs the way of life of Indigenous communities, drains their water reserves and disregards their rights to determine what kinds of economic developments can take place on their own lands. In Africa, Reuters also reported that at the three emerging lithium mines in Zimbabwe, Namibia and again, the DRC, continue to be responsible for unsafe working conditions, mine collapses, child labour, and corruption.
Nickel production too is similarly tainted with abuses to local communities. Vast mining projects in Indonesia have razed forests to the ground, evicted people, and polluted rivers and seas—hugely harming fishing communities. According to a report by Climate Rights International (CRI) that Amnesty refers to, Halmahera Island in Indonesia serves as a prime example for such violations. Smelting operations at the Indonesia Weda Bay Industrial Park (IWIP) and nickel mining have poisoned nearby sea waters with oil and excess heat. Fishermen are forced to venture further into sea both because of this pollution and IWIP’s private security. This industrial park—holding the largest nickel mine in the world according to reports–is owned by two companies: France’s Eramet and China’s Tsingshan Holding Group. Similar concerns are also reported in the Philippines.
Injustice continues up the supply chain
Host countries most often do not have the capacity to carry out processing and production operations which are more lucrative, Amnesty points out. Minerals in a raw or minimally processed state are sold off in international markets. “Companies and financiers reap the profits at each stop along the battery mineral supply chain while host governments that lack secondary and tertiary industries – the majority – lose out. Rather than help communities benefit from the transition mineral boom, this model reinforces a cycle of dependency, boom and bust economics, and extractivism,”Amnesty adds.
Attempts to fight such injustices lead to the criminalisation of Indigenous communities, climate justice activists and environmental human rights defenders. They are subject to excessive or unnecessary use of force and injuries or deaths from weapons used to disperse crowds. “The Business and Human Rights Resource Centre reports that 148 attacks on human rights defenders between 2010 and 2021 were related to transition mineral mining and 41% of documented attacks were committed against Indigenous Peoples. It further reports 631 allegations of human rights abuse related to energy transition mineral extraction in this period,” the Amnesty report says.