I’m contacting you in light of our latest investigation, which concerns the use of forced labor in China’s food processing industry, and a link we’ve discovered with an auditable standard managed by your organization.

Our investigation has identified 11 Marine Stewardship Council (MSC) certified seafood processing facilities in China using forced labor from the Xinjiang Uyghur Autonomous Region (XUAR).

The MSC certificates were issued after all 11 processing plants are known to have accepted Uyghurs through Chinese government labor transfer programs, and the investigation demonstrates the pr…

Thanks for reaching out to Sedex and providing us with the opportunity to contribute to this conversation.

We’re pleased that the MSC recognises the value of a SMETA [Sedex Members' Ethical Trade Audit] audit as part of their methodology. We can’t claim detailed knowledge of what other activities and standards they include within their methodology and certification decisions, so it’s not appropriate for us to try and comment on these.

Please note that SMETA itself, or a work site receiving a SMETA audit, is not a certification of workplace conditions and practices. A SMETA audit is a form of…

Thank you for your response and the engagement on this query, we're certainly keen to understand more.

We appreciate Sedex's role as a standard holder with limited involvement in assessment and corrective action. Our findings suggest that social audits conducted against multiple standards over several years have consistently failed to detect Uyghur forced labor at 11 sites. According to our records, at least one of the MSC-certified processing plants has undergone SMETA audit.

Noting Sedex's expectation that SMETA should identify ethical and social issues at audited worksites, are Sedex able…

Thanks for your note. We’d be happy to look within our platform at the individual sites, if you could kindly share their details with us, so that we can conduct an internal review of their audits. However, please bear in mind that our terms and conditions prohibit us from sharing or disclosing specific information on any individual member site, or audit, as our members hold ownership of the data on the Sedex platform.

Sedex finds instances of forced labour deeply concerning, and as you know, it is a particularly difficult issue to detect, prevent and remedy.

SMETA audits cover the entire ETI…

Would Sedex's internal review preclude confirming to us which sites were audited under SMETA? And would it preclude disclosing to us the identities of the auditors?

You explain that "behaviours may still be covered up and therefore extremely difficult for auditors to find" and that it is "not advisable to depend solely on a single tool to identify and address all human rights risks". You further note challenges in conducting audits "within some high-risk regions, including constraints on access by independent auditors".

In the context of our findings in China, would you agree that one inter…

Thank you for your email, I am sorry we couldn’t quite meet your deadline of yesterday.

We are currently carrying out an internal review of the relevant sites and audits. We are also currently reviewing Sedex’s guidance and stated position on the role of audits regarding state-imposed forced labour, which we will share with you as soon as we’re able to.

Unfortunately we can’t publicly share findings from specific audits – as noted earlier, this is due to our members holding ownership of the data on the Sedex platform. We can only publish analysis and findings using aggregate data where the f…

Thanks for your last email and your detailed response. We have a few more follow-up questions on this issue:

1. Has Sedex completed its internal review of relevant sites? Can you inform us of the aggregate number of SMETA-audited sites?
2. Please could you clarify your current guidance and stated position on the role of audits regarding state-imposed forced labor, as well as the timeline for the guidance review you mention?
3. You note that audits "may be less effective than undercover journalists at detecting criminal activity that may have been covered up". What if the activity hasn't been c…

My apologies in the delay to respond; thanks for your follow-up questions. Please find below our responses - could you let us know approximately if and/or when you intend to publish any responses from Sedex?

1. We’re still undergoing our internal review on the matter, and unfortunately cannot disclose details of Sedex members or audits.
2. We anticipate being able to share our updated position and guidance on the role of audits in relation to state-imposed forced labour by mid-August. Our guidance prior to this update is that effective supply chain human rights due diligence, including on fo…

Since we were last in touch with you, our ongoing investigation into the use of forced labor in China’s seafood processing industry has uncovered further findings which we wanted to raise with you. We have found visual evidence of North Korean workers at seafood processing plants in Liaoning Province, China, including two called Donggang Jinhui Foodstuff and Donggang Haimeng. While we are unable to share the evidentiary materials with you at this time, we can say this includes videos of North Koreans workers at Donggang Jinhui and at Donggang Haimeng in 2023. Certification details posted by Do…

We commend you on your story regarding North Korean labour in the Chinese seafood industry, which is clearly the result of extensive effort, resources and dedication.

I’m contacting you to request a small clarification regarding your reference to Sedex in the El País, Le Monde and other outlets’ articles. Sedex itself does not “review workplaces” – we provide businesses with the necessary tools, such as our data platform/network and methodology, to enhance their understanding of workplaces and supply chain practices. As outlined on our [website](https://www.sedex.com/about/who-we-work-with/af…

Thanks for your email and continued willingness to engage on these important issues.

Your recent email states: "Sedex itself does not “review workplaces” – we provide businesses with the necessary tools, such as our data platform/network and methodology, to enhance their understanding of workplaces and supply chain practices."

The two publications you mention in your recent email -- El Pais in Spain and Le Monde in France -- have published our stories and in them they clearly state that video shown at the Jinhui event "showed off a wide array of Western certifications, from companies like…