Unilateral Legislation in Global Supply Chain: Case of Conflict Minerals
Linyufei

Master of International Law, Wuhan University，Wuhan, Hubei Province，430072；

Abstract: This article examines the legal, political, and practical implications of unilateral legislation aimed at regulating global supply chains through the lens of conflict mineral governance. Focusing on the United States’ Section 1502 of the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act and the European Union’s Regulation (EU) 2017/821, it analyzes how these instruments attempt to disrupt the link between mineral extraction and armed conflict, particularly in the Democratic Republic of the Congo (DRC) and other conflict-affected and high-risk areas (CAHRAs). Despite being domestically enacted, both laws exhibit extraterritorial effects, effectively imposing compliance obligations on foreign actors beyond the territorial jurisdiction of the regulating state. The article critically evaluates the legitimacy of these unilateral measures under international law, especially in light of state sovereignty, jurisdictional limits, and the absence of multilateral consensus. It also assesses the empirical outcomes of these regimes, including unintended socioeconomic consequences for artisanal miners and enforcement inconsistencies within the EU. Ultimately, the study contends that while unilateral legislation plays a catalytic role in shaping corporate accountability, its effectiveness and legitimacy remain contingent on broader international legal harmonization and institutional support for actors in vulnerable regions.

Keywords: Conflict minerals; supply chain due diligence; global governance; extraterritoriality

References

[1]A Reinisch, ‘The Changing International Legal Framework for Dealing with Non-State Actors’ in P Alston (ed), Non-State Actors and Human Rights (Oxford University Press 2005) 37, 58.

[2]L Partzsch ‘The New EU Conflict Minerals Regulation: Normative Power in International Relations? (2018) 9(4) Global Policy 481ff.

[3]Phoebe Okowa, The Pitfalls of Unilateral Legislation in International Law: Lessons from Conflict Mineral Legislations, International & Comparative Law Quarterly, (Cambridge University Press 2020)

[4]Melvin Ayogu and Zenia Lewis, Conflict Minerals: An Assessment of the Dodd-Frank Act, https://www.brookings.edu/articles/conflict-minerals-an-assessment-of-the-dodd-frank-act/.

[5]Addaney, Michael, and Emma Charlene Lubaale. 2021. "An Unintended Legacy: The External Policy Responses of the USA and European Union to Conflict Minerals in Africa" Laws 10, no. 2: 50.

[6]Fabiana Di Lorenzo and Estelle Levin-Nally, The ‘Conflict Minerals Regulation’ or the ‘Regulation on Responsible Sourcing of Minerals’: Evolving Purpose and Terminology, 22 Feb. 2021, https://www.cambridge.org/core/blog/2021/02/22/the-conflict-minerals-regulation-or-the-regulation-on-responsible-sourcing-of-minerals-evolving-purpose-and-terminology/.

[7]Fieldfisher, The battle for stronger conflict minerals legislation in Europe, 31 Jan. 2020, https://www.mining.com/web/the-battle-for-stronger-conflict-minerals-legislation-in-europe/