Opening Remarks by KP Chair – Kimberley Process Intersessional 2025

AHMED BIN SULEYAM 

May 15

Your Excellencies, distinguished participants, colleagues, and friends, Observers of the Kimberley Process:  World Diamond Council,· Civil Society Coalition,  African Diamond Producers Association, and  The Diamond Development Initiative.

Good morning to you all.

Let me begin by expressing my sincere thanks to Her Excellency Safeya Hashem Al Safi, Acting Assistant Undersecretary for the Commercial Control and Governance Sector at the Ministry of Economy of the United Arab Emirates.

When we gathered here one year ago, we announced 2024 as the Year of Delivery. Today I am proud to say that not only did we deliver, but we also laid the foundation for the KP’s long-term resilience.

Over the past year, we made meaningful progress – institutionally and operationally. The World Trade Organization’s waiver for the KP Certification Scheme was renewed for another 6 years. In March, the UN General Assembly passed Resolution A/79/L63. We welcomed Uzbekistan as our 60^th participant. And we lifted the embargo on rough diamond exports from the Central African Republic, under enhanced vigilance, thanks to the excellent work led by South Africa and the Working Group on Monitoring.

We took a decisive step by operationalising the Kimberley Process Secretariat in Gaborone. With Botswana’s support, we hired staff and formed a dedicated sub-team to manage the governance, budget and work plan. We look forward to welcoming the first Undersecretary this August.

On that note, I also remind those behind on their contributions to the KP Secretariat to make their payments without delay.

Another important milestone was the overhaul of the KP’s digital identity. We refreshed the website from the ground up to ensure that the role of the KP, and its important work, is available to the broader public.

We have also seen transitions.

Carolyne Francis, Chair of the Working Group on Statistics, has retired – and I thank her for her dedication. The U.S. has indicated that they will continue to chair the group, with India as Vice-Chair. I hope to see the U.S. deepen its KP engagement, potentially through its own chairmanship in the next two to three years.

All countries face issues when it comes to chairing the KP. The UAE knows this all too well.

It’s worth recalling what transpired in the build-up to our first chairmanship.

2011 was the first year the UAE considered hosting the KP for 2012, when the U.S. faced funding constraints. We were offered the opportunity to co-chair – perhaps the first time that concept was raised – but we opted to wait.

Instead we submitted our first application in 2014, before our inaugural chairmanship was confirmed for 2016.

It’s fair to say we were not exactly welcomed with open arms by all. In fact, Civil Society, under the misguided and self-proclaimed leadership of Alan Martin, orchestrated a full boycott of the KP – even though many NGOs did not agree with it.

And we know now, of course, that Alan Martin pushed forward to discredit the UAE, despite objections during an NGO meeting that took place in Freetown, insisting that “their donors” required them to keep the boycott going.

In response to Alan’s attempts to intimidate us, I wrote to representatives of the United States, Australia, Canada and the European Union to clarify their positions.

No one confirmed Alan’s statement. To the credit of Giorgios Tsitsopoulos [TSEE-SO-POOLOS], the EU’s KP Representative at the time, he responded constructively and forcefully to dissociate the EU from these claims.

Their words – and their support during Plenary – meant a great deal, which I will quote again here:

“The European Union and its Member States would like in the first place to congratulate the United Arab Emirates for its Chairmanship of the Kimberley Process, and to welcome the results achieved towards strengthening the KP and to confront the challenges of the future.”

This really highlights the good relations with the EU, which continue to this day.

The wider point is this: when the situation demands it, you must step forward. But you are not alone and can always count on the support of those around you. That is the spirit we need this year.

And we urgently need a pipeline of members to chair or co-chair the KP, whether it be Sierra Leone, Ghana, Japan, Norway, the United States, Türkiye or Brazil.

This Tuesday during the Working Group of Diamond Experts meeting, and on Friday to everyone, we will present Verifico – a digital solution for secure KP certification. We will be integrating Verifico into the UAE’s Salesforce-based KP system. But rest assured, Verifico is built to be system-agnostic, and can connect to S.A.P., Oracle or any other global platform, and regardless of data jurisdiction.

It enhances certificate security and traceability and may well serve as the first “block” in a blockchain solution.

Building Verifico required a significant investment, and the UAE is proud to make this intellectual property freely available to the Kimberley Process – a gesture that reflects the legacy we wish to leave behind. Verifico will be handed over to the KP Secretariat upon completion.

We believe Verifico can support the statistical reporting infrastructure, and we look forward to hearing from the Working Group of Diamond Experts on how we can define standardised data inputs.

In the same vein, I also call on the KP Secretariat to assume full responsibility for the KP’s statistical database over the next 12 months – an essential step in modernising our data capabilities and enhancing institutional ownership.

Looking beyond Verifico, the time has come for the Kimberley Process to embrace artificial intelligence. As the UAE is proving, AI will transform public governance, compliance, and lawmaking.

The opportunities for the KP range from anomaly detection to automated risk profiling and certificate validation and I encourage all participants and working groups to find ways to implement AI as best practice in your offices and sessions.

As many of you know, 2025 has been designated the Year of Best Practice – although it seems to be overshadowed by a “Year of Negotiations”…

While the KP is a consensus-driven process there is nothing in our founding documents that prevents participants from going above and beyond the minimum requirements. We must see this as an opportunity to build momentum, share experiences, and move the KP forward without waiting for consensus on every detail.

We must also recognise the broader issues at play in the natural diamond market.

The growing presence of lab-grown diamonds is one such reality.

Let me ask an honest question: where is it safe to wear natural diamonds today?

From Barcelona to Paris, recent years have seen a sharp spike in theft and street crime across some of the world’s most affluent and economically advanced cities.

These are the words of the Metropolitan Police in the UK:

“Keep your valuables out of sight. Keep jewellery covered when walking down the street.”

Or take the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Singapore:

“Avoid carrying jewellery if going to Barcelona.”

And for those who do wear jewellery in public, some now choose to wear lab-grown instead of natural diamonds in case they get robbed. The very incentive to wear fine jewellery is fading. Even as an investment, jewellery struggles to compete with alternatives such as gold, crypto and other cashless, easily securitised assets.

Others are drawn by sentimentality: we now see lab-grown diamonds made from the ashes of beloved pets. Meanwhile, the message of tradition and marriage is struggling to resonate as the share of younger generations making long-term commitments shrinks.

In the US, more than 60% of the bridal market has now moved to lab-grown, while the one-to-three carat segment may not fully return to natural. Yet let us be clear: natural diamonds cannot be replaced. The notion that lab-grown will entirely displace natural is no more realistic than imagining a world where everyone eats lab-grown meat. At the least, it will attract different market segments.

Similarly, the irreplaceable nature, symbolism, and emotional connection of natural diamonds continues to hold meaning across generations.

To recap the message from David Kellie, CEO of the Natural Diamond Council, at last year’s plenary we urgently need to spend money on category level marketing.

The Kimberley Process exists to ensure this continuity for natural diamonds. But the reference to lab-grown is valid. The point is this: the KP must not get distracted or misappropriated to pursue narrow geopolitical interests. This detracts from our shared mission and the bigger issues at play.

To the Ad Hoc Committee on Review and Reform, I offer a clear message: this must be your year of delivery. The Committee has a vital responsibility to complete the Review and Reform Cycle this year. That includes reaching consensus on an updated definition of conflict diamonds that reflects today’s realities, bolstering technical assistance to diamond-producing communities, and enhancing the KP’s governance through consolidating the Core Document. With the KP Secretariat now staffed, we must ensure it is structured and empowered to implement the next chapter of this review cycle.

I also commend the Working Group on Artisanal and Alluvial Production for its recent workshop in Sierra Leone with the Mano River countries. This is a great example of targeted technical support in action and shows what the KP can achieve when it is at its best.

Side sessions remain a highlight. I thank the organisers of last night’s presentation by e-Valuer and invite everyone to tonight’s video presentation by the Civil Society Coalition. These events bring different voices to the table and we need to remain open-minded to constructive criticisms.

We are also pleased to share that 31 KP Participants – more than half of the KP family – have endorsed Zimbabwe’s proposal to convene a Special Session of Plenary this Friday afternoon. This marks the second time that Plenary convenes during an Intersessional – following the precedent we set last year.

Before I conclude, allow me to reflect on the KP’s broader value. Because the diamond industry is far more advanced in many respects than other industries – especially when it comes to responsible sourcing.

The KP is the only working system that stems the flow of conflict diamonds and it’s the only system that is trusted by Africa. I challenge anyone to name a system or industry which operates at the same level of efficiency and trust.

For just one example, take Apple – a company commanding nearly 30% of the global smartphone market, with operating and marketing budgets in the hundreds of billions that exceed the entire diamond supply chain. This company operates as a bastion of socially conscious innovation and yet it stands accused of sourcing conflict minerals from the Democratic Republic of Congo.

Despite its vast resources, Apple has failed to carry out even the most basic checks to ensure its supply chains are conflict-free. At best, this is a staggering failure of due diligence. At worst, it is the quiet complicity of “blood tech” – the result of a system with no meaningful accountability or pressure to act. Maybe we need a movie like Blood Diamond – Blood Phone or Blood Circuit – to wake up the tech industry…

Now, Apple did issue a directive last year instructing suppliers to halt sourcing Critical Minerals from the Democratic Republic of Congo. I find this impractical and, quite possibly, insincere.

To take just one of these minerals – cobalt – which is vital to lithium-ion batteries powering nearly all Apple devices. Apple alone requires roughly 12,000 tonnes of cobalt annually. The Democratic Republic of Congo accounts for 70-75% of global production; Australia and Canada only produce 4% and 2% respectively.

Simply put, even with all the cobalt from Australia and Canada combined, it would fall short. Apple remains tied to Congolese cobalt.

And given the sheer scale of global cobalt consumption, it’s almost certain that many of us in this room – despite our own best intentions – are carrying devices tainted with conflict minerals.

The KP may not be perfect. But we are doing the work – and that matters. It is a global best practice and the world would be a better place if other critical minerals replicated the Kimberley Process Certification Scheme. We are here to share our knowledge.

Which brings me to a topic that we have failed to properly acknowledge for many years: the arms trade. The illegal flow of weapons continues to destabilise diamond-producing nations.

How can we consciously speak of preventing trade in conflict minerals and turn a blind eye to this?

We must ask – what is the arms industry doing to self-regulate? To ensure traceability? To prevent arms from fuelling black market violence?

We cannot continue to be silent. It’s high time we acknowledge this and start talking about solutions. In the spirit of the KP’s Year of Best Practice, we should explore how to cooperate with the Arms Trade Treaty and the UN Register of Conventional Arms.

They should adopt KP-style frameworks – consistent monitoring, enforcement, and accountability – to bring transparency to this sector.

Your Excellencies, ladies and gentlemen,

We have achieved a great deal. But we have a lot more work to do. The KP must continue to evolve and we must remain vigilant in protecting the legitimacy of the natural diamond trade. I look forward to a productive and inspiring week with you all.

Thank you.