CASE STUDIES
On-the-ground due diligence for a high-risk sourcing decision in DRC
What was at stake
Our client was evaluating whether to begin purchasing copper ore from a third-party supplier in the Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC).
The decision carried significant risk. Sourcing concentrates from a third party in a high-risk context could expose the business to legal, operational, and reputational issues and, critically, could link due to the complexity of the situation. Before proceeding, the client needed to understand what risks were present and whether these risks could be mitigated or, where necessary, remediated.
The context
This would be the first time the client sourced material from a third party in the DRC and management required enhanced assurance before any commitment was made.
An initial desk-based risk assessment had identified several potentially severe risks and impacts. However, the information available was insufficient to assess their significance accurately or make a well-informed sourcing decision. Further investigation on the ground was needed.
What we did
Prior to the site visit, we engaged local contacts to triangulate reported allegations of illegal activity, mapped mineral flows between the mine site, local depots, and processing facilities, and used satellite imagery to develop a preliminary picture of the artisanal and small-scale mining (ASM) presence and security context. This preparatory work was critical in directing attention to the most relevant areas within a large mining area and with limited time on site.
Once on the ground, we gathered evidence through direct observation, documentation review, and stakeholder interviews (mine management, workers, ASM actors, and local community representatives). Rather than applying a fixed checklist, the approach was flexible and responsive to what we observed and heard on site. Desk-based findings were actively tested against on-the-ground evidence, with prioritisation guided by severity of potential harm, particularly where risks would be difficult to mitigate given the operating context.
Through this approach we were able to identify risks that would not have surfaced through a desk-based assessment alone.
What we uncovered
The combination of prior preparation and adaptive on-site investigation revealed several significant issues:
- Illegal presence of public security forces on site, operating without a clear legal mandate
- Potential collusion between security forces, foreign traders, semi-mechanised illegal mining operators, and ASM communities
- On-the-ground evidence of recent activities directly contradicting statements made by site management in the supplier questionnaire that had been sent to our client
- Lack of effective controls to prevent mixing of mechanised mine production with third-party material originating from ASM sources
- ASM activity significantly beyond what had been reported, including the presence of comptoirs[1] and depots within the mining area, and evidence of external actors operating in pits that had been reported to be closed or inactive
[1] A comptoir is a licensed buying station or trading house where raw, unrefined minerals are purchased from local miners and middlemen before entering global supply chains.
The difference it made
The assessment gave the client a clear, evidence-based picture of actual site conditions, including risks that were significantly more complex than the desk-based review had indicated. This enabled the client to:
- Make an informed, evidence-based sourcing decision with a grounded understanding of which risks could be addressed and which could not be realistically mitigated or remediated, based on our practical recommendations.
- Define the conditions for responsible sourcing by clarifying what would need to be in place before sourcing from the site could be considered, in line with legal requirements, international standards such as the OECD Minerals Guidance, and the client’s own Code of Conduct.
Beyond the immediate decision, our work highlighted the complexity of third-party sourcing in high-risk contexts and informed the need for a structured internal approach to evaluating such decisions. Our report and presentation to senior management substantially strengthened senior management’s understanding of responsible sourcing risks in this context. It also enabled the client to demonstrate alignment with expectations under applicable due diligence frameworks, particularly in relation to identifying, assessing, and responding to adverse impacts.
