Child Labour in Cocoa Industry

With the fears that the multi-billion dollar cocoa industry may have consigned the Harkin-Engel Protocol to the dustbin of history, Olaolu Olusina writes that there seems to be no end to the suffering of the poor children working in about two million cocoa farms in West Africa

For seven years, the world was fooled. Promises of great expectations by an industry that thrives on the sweat of poor African kid laborers have amounted to nothing. Reports of recent investigations have also indicated that the self-acclaimed and much flaunted efforts by the multi-billion dollar cocoa industry are simply a ruse.

Specifically, the Tulane University, United States that was commissioned by the American Government to investigate the efforts made so far in its latest report, said specific actions expected to combat child and forced labor in West Africa do not really pan out on the ground.

From every indication, the stalled Harkin-Engel Protocol, a self-policing policy, voluntary agreed upon by the industry seven years ago, as a way of protecting thousands of children working in the numerous cocoa plantations of West Africa, may have been consigned to the dustbin of history. Yet, in the United States alone, big multinationals who use cocoa, the 'yellow pod' produced in West Africa, sell a whopping $13 billion worth of chocolate every year, making huge profits from the sweat of poor African kids.

It would be recalled that intense media exposure of child and forced labor in West Africa which supplies 70 per cent of the world cocoa, with 40 per cent of that coming from Cote d'Ivoire, had led to the intervention of the American Congress in 2001. Americans, no doubt, love chocolate to a fault, but were not ready to continue consuming what is regarded as 'blood chocolate'. They had therefore set in motion a move that would ensure that chocolate was produced from cocoa that are free of child slavery.

Director of Save the Children Fund in Mali, Salia Kante, had painted a gory picture of the menace. “People who are drinking cocoa and eating chocolate are drinking and eating the blood of children,” Kante had stated. Therefore, on June 28, 2001, the American Congress through the House of Representatives voted 291-115 to set aside funding within the Food and Drug Administration Department to develop a labeling program for products made with cocoa.

Democrat Representative Elliot Engel who moved the motion got support from Senator Tom Harkin for the legislative action. According to Engel, “if we can have our tuna dolphin-free, we can have our chocolate slave free.” The label was therefore intended to distinguish between cocoa products made with child slave labor and those that were not.

The response of the chocolate industry to the legislative threat was swift, knowing full well the impact of such legislation on its business. Former Senators, George Mitchel and Bob Dole were hired to lobby against the bill. Though they succeeded in stopping it, the industry had to accept a compromise - the Harkin-Engel Protocol of September 19, 2001 signed in Washington.

Named after US Senator Tom Harkin and Representative Elliot Engel who championed the original legislation and later spearheaded talks with the Chocolate Manufacturers Association and the World Cocoa Foundation, the Harkin-Engel Protocol was envisioned as a self-policing policy to better identify and address abusive child labor practices in the cocoa-growing areas of West Africa. The International Labor Organization (ILO), International Union of Food and Allied Workers (IUF), the anti-slavery group, 'Free the Slaves' and the National Consumers League (NCL) were initial members of an advisory group that participated in the agreement.

These non-industries, private sector stakeholders, together with US government officials, were expected to be partners in carrying out all aspects of the protocol within the first four years with July 1, 2005 set as the initial deadline. It was an elated Representative Engel that gave a progress report on the agreement to the House on Monday, July 8, 2002, about a year after the agreement was signed.

“I am pleased with and proud of the enormous progress that has been made toward ending this terrible situation. First, let me congratulate the chocolate industry for quickly deciding to tackle this problem head on. The industry joined a number of non-governmental organizations in signing an agreement, now known as the 'Harkin-Engel Protocol', which set up a framework for dealing with the problem of child slavery in the cocoa fields.

“The protocol is a serious commitment by the stakeholders to create an historic effort to end child slavery in this industry," he said. Expressing his joy, Engel further stated that as other members listened with rapt attention: “This effort is not just the result of the United States Congress though. Our colleagues in the parliament of Great Britain have also been working on this issue.

“On May 20, 2002, the House of Commons held what we could call a special order on the specific issue of child slavery in the cocoa fields of West Africa. During the debate, the Honorable Tony Colman of Putney quoted his constituent who is an expert on the problems of child trafficking and slavery, Professor Kevin Bales, as saying “the protocol… is a very good thing. It is the first time that an industry has taken social, moral and economic responsibility for their entire product chain. The anti-slavery movement has been seeking such an agreement for 160 years.”

Engel did not stop there as he explained further: “In January of this year (2002), the Government of Ivory Coast ratified two important international labor agreements governing child labor-conventions 138 and 182 of the ILO.

“By becoming signatories to these conventions, the Government of the Ivory Coast took a huge step toward implementing responsible labor standards for children within its own border. In part, because of this step, the Bush Administration in May 2002 granted the Ivory Coast eligibility status under the African Growth and Opportunity Act,” he stressed

While agreeing that “the problem of child slavery in West Africa is as much the responsibility of the governments there as it is our own,” Engel however affirmed: “Today, I am pleased and proud to report that Congress is a part of the movement to put an end to one of the most egregious ills in the world today—child slavery.”
But Engel and the American Congress must have

been carried away, or so it seemed, by the initial enthusiasm of the cocoa industry to the protocol. Not only that, the entire world that has been watching with keen interest in anticipation of progress must have been fooled as well.

A 2002 joint study published by ILO and the International Institute for Tropical Agriculture (IITA) still found that an estimated 284,000 children on cocoa farms in West Africa were “involved in hazardous work, unprotected or have been trafficked,” mostly in farms in Cote d'Ivoire, Ghana, Cameroon and Nigeria.

The July 1, 2005 initial deadline could not also be met due to what the industry referred to as the crisis in Cote d'Ivoire. Though the industry still expressed its commitment to the protocol, the new deadline of July 1, 2008 that was agreed upon narrowed down the certification to 50 per cent of cocoa from only Ghana and Cote d'Ivoire.

Even at that, the new deadline had come and gone like any other day. Little or nothing is on ground to show in terms of certification and the targets set seven years ago.

Not many analysts are quite surprised at the failure. They had seen the handwriting on the wall and predicted that the industry was going to miss the deadline. Just few days to July 1, Adrienne Fitch-Frankel, Fair Trade Director of Global Exchange, a human rights organization, had warned that “the industry is at risk of missing the upcoming deadline yet again.”

She stated that “the very title of the Harkin-Engel protocol commits the industry to....’immediate action for the elimination of the worst forms of child labor.’” Fitch-Frankel also lamented that “for over seven years, children have continued to languish in slavery and consumers have waited for untainted chocolate. “It is simply sad that the chocolate manufacturers have redefined the word ‘certification’ to mean 'data collection', adding "Industry even titled its 2007 version of its definition a ‘certification concept.’

Fitch-Frankel said a report funded by the US Department of Labor stated that the industry's current definition of certification is a misnomer. “What industry is currently pursuing under its own definition of certification is not truly certification that there is no abusive child labor,” she said. “It is a survey to determine the prevalence of abusive child labor.”

However, rising to the defence of the cocoa industry was Emmanuel Owusu-Manu, a cocoa specialist and economist with the Cocoa Producers Alliance (COPAL), an inter-governmental organization comprising 10 cocoa-producing countries. He told THISDAY at the headquarters of COPAL in Lagos that rights activists are taking the issue too far. He stated that distinction should be made between ‘child labor’ and ‘child work’, saying what is being termed as 'child labor' in most cases is actually 'child work," a situation where children help their parents on the farms.

Owusu-Manu who disclosed that he grew up in Tafoe, a cocoa-growing community in Ghana, asked: “How much work can a child really do on a cocoa farm?” saying “If people don't understand how cocoa is being farmed, it is easy to believe that children are involved.”

He said most of the cocoa-growing communities in Ghana have organized ‘gangs’ responsible for various assignments in the production chain. He stated that “aside the farmers and their families, if you bring any other person to do their job, such person will be resisted.”

But in the face of the intense media campaign and obvious evidence of the menace, Owusu-Manu said though nobody can dispute that child labor exists, it is in isolated cases. “Agreed that child labor exist in the fishing industry and is more pronounced, the case of the cocoa industry is simply being exaggerated,” he said. “I don't know what happens in Cote d'Ivoire, but in Ghana and Nigeria, it is in isolated cases.”

According to him, “the fact that we have isolated cases of an issue does not mean that things are bad,” as he stressed that “even in advanced countries, we still have isolated cases.” He nonetheless asked: “Why would anybody want to use child labour that is cheap?” adding “those who know about cocoa won’t bring children into the farm because you won't get anything out of them. It becomes an economic issue and as such cannot be sustainable.”He disclosed that “about 2005, IITA in Ibadan, Nigeria did a report on child labour and came out to say that the trend is insignificant, noting that children only work in hazardous conditions.” The COPAL official also told THISDAY that “COPAL members have ratified ILO (182) Convention regarding children rights and every two years, every country gives a written report to the ILO on progress made.

THISDAY ONLINE