In 1996, a famous American television celebrity’s attention was called out by the media regarding her US$300 million line of clothing carried by a multinational retail corporation based in the US. The issue was that the clothes were sewn by 13-14 year olds in a daily 20-hour shift in Honduras, thus, earning for herself the title “America’s Sweatshop Queen”. This scandal gave birth to the Fair Labor Association, non profit organization of socially responsible companies, college, universities, and civil societies which monitors factory labor conditions worldwide.

Where I was born and raised, there was little concern for child labour. A child’s place was in school during the months of June up to March the following year. Summer vacation was in April and May. Depending on whether or not there was family money to pursue undergraduate studies, most certainly, the child knew the ABCs and how to count money by high school graduation. The Philippine population was 40 million in 1974, the year I emigrated from that country. In 2020, the population is 109,581, 078 – an exponential rise in more than 40 years. Naturally, the standard of living fell and with it, whatever social net the family had, if there was ever one to start with, also fell. A one-income-family became unheard of and children helped in putting food on the table. Labour became a major export of the Philippines. And because the Philippines is known for its beaches, tourists flocked to this Far East Asian country. They were joined by pedophiles from all over the world, with a town south of Manila as their favourite destination. Sick. Yet, there it was. A Filipino nun once stopped to chat at my CNE booth and revealed to me that she worked at a refuge for children exploited by pedophiles. She wasn’t asking for donations but merely stating facts. So, with this background, I try not to judge child labour in poor and developing countries. I would much prefer that children work in reasonable hours at sweatshops than be victims of pedophiles because of poverty.

In 2014, the world’s attention was caught by the presence of what looked like concentration camps in Xinjiang, an autonomous territory in northwest China. These so called “re-education centres” as referred to by China, numbering around 380 and which housed between one million and three million Uyghurs, were being used to manufacture products and clothes exported to first world countries like the US and Canada and members of the European Union. The detained Uyghurs were being used to manufacture merchandise sold in designer labels like Nike, Adidas, H&M, The Gap, Uniqlo, to name a few. In short, 83 major brands were found to be involved in forced labour of Uyghurs from Xinjiang. China’s response was it is preventing terrorism in the region which is predominantly Muslim. In other words, it is being proactive. The West, however, sees this as a violation of human rights and an exploitation of forced labour. Sadly, I side with the West. China has never been transparent in its dealings with the West, especially the COVID 19 issue. Its presence in the Scarborough Shoal has been in defiance of the UN Convention on the Law of the Sea ruling in 2016 dismissing the ruling as “nothing more than  piece of waste paper”.

Investors of these high-end products have requested disclosure about their supply chains and told them to not find themselves in situations that may lead to human rights abuses. The 21st century way of conducting business puts human rights issue front and centre. Any business practice that puts people’s health and safety at risk, as alleged in these Uyghur camps becomes a risky venture.