The rapid transition towards electric vehicles (EVs) is oft-celebrated as an essential pathway to decarbonization and, accordingly, climate sustainability. Yet a troubling reality lies beneath the surface-level image of clean mobility: namely, the fact that the supply chains that power EV batteries are entangled within a number of severe controversies, such as human rights violations and environmental detriment. Nowhere is this dilemma more acute than in the Democratic Republic of the Congo (DRC), the source of most of the global cobalt supply. Cobalt is and has long been a critical mineral in the composition of lithium-ion batteries. Thus, the question arises for corporations and regulators alike: who will bear the responsibility for these hidden costs of the EV revolution?
Cobalt Mining and Human Rights Abuses in the DRC
EVs are increasingly touted as an indispensable component of sustainable transport and the climate mitigation that accompanies it. However, the ongoing reliance of EV batteries on cobalt brings to light numerous ethical and legal obstacles. As the DRC accounts for 70% of aggregate international cobalt production (most prominently through a diverse mixture of large-scale corporate operations alongside artisanal and small-scale mining, otherwise known as ASM), corporations and legislators must assume accountability for the staggering risk of human rights abuses ranging from child labor to environmental damage associated with such production.
The matter of artisanal cobalt mining is particularly alarming. Experts estimate that approximately 15 to 30 percent of the DRC’s cobalt output summation is produced by way of ASM, and very often so under hazardous, unregulated conditions. Miners and the families they provide for, many of whom live in dire poverty, labor without any sort of protective equipment. This results in the dangerous exposure of all miners, but especially children, to perils such as toxic dust and the perpetual risk of collapse. Other reports have detailed
forced evictions in dominant mining regions like Kolwezi - most prominently including the burning of settlements and physical violence inflicted upon local populations.
The Issue of Supply Chain Accountability
In light of these human rights violations, corporations sourcing cobalt often claim plausible deniability on the basis that the convoluted nature of supply chains obscures artisanal sources. Nonetheless, international organizations have more strongly challenged these justifications as of late. The UN Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights, for instance, along with the OECD Due Diligence Guidelines, impose upon companies a duty to identify and mitigate human rights violations and environmental risks throughout their value chains. Even so, the actual integration of these principles has remained largely limited until recently.
The European Union’s Regulatory Turn
In the European Union (EU), a sweeping shift toward mandatory due diligence is now underway. The Corporate Sustainability Due Diligence Directive (CSDDD) was formally adopted in mid-2024 and mandates that companies with significant EU operations or turnover (exceeding set boundaries like 1,000 employees or €450 million of turnover) must conduct comprehensive due diligence across value chains. Most importantly, this includes raw material sourcing such as cobalt. The directive requires firms to incorporate due diligence into existing governing systems, identify adverse impacts, enforce mitigation strategies, monitor effectiveness, report publicly, and provide grievance mechanisms. Non-compliance accordingly carries significant civil liability and sanctions such as fines tied to turnover and other reputational harms. The CSDDD complements other EU instruments like the Batteries Regulation, which required traceability and risk assessment for battery materials, and sector-specific rules aimed predominantly at raw minerals. This approach hence reflects an ever-broadening consensus that disclosure in and of itself is far from sufficient - regulators now expect firms to more proactively prevent adverse human rights and environmental outcomes.
Limited Avenues for Accountability in the United States
Legal avenues in the United States, by contrast, remain constrained. Plaintiffs have attempted to seek redress under the Alien Tort Statute (ATS), filing lawsuits on behalf of Congolese families against U.S. tech and EV companies for alleged complicity in child labor within cobalt supply chains. One particularly prominent class-action case filed in 2019 named Apple, Microsoft, Dell, and Tesla among the corporate defendants. Although the D.C. Circuit in 2024 recognized plaintiffs' standing for damages, it nonetheless dismissed the claim for failure to state a plausible causal link between corporate conduct and mining abuses. The ATS’s utility has additionally been curtailed by successive Supreme Court decisions including Nestlé USA, Inc. v. Doe, which significantly limited extraterritorial applications of U.S. law to foreign harms.
Beyond pure tort liability, U.S.-based corporations could potentially face exposure under consumer-protection statutes or SEC disclosure obligations should they make misleading claims about ‘ethical’ or ‘conflict-free’ sourcing while simultaneously failing to conduct due diligence. Regardless, enforcement results remain limited absent clear demonstration of deception.
The DRC’s Domestic Response: Formalizing Artisanal Mining
The institutional response within the DRC itself has also begun to evolve with the establishment of the Entreprise Générale du Cobalt (EGC) - a state-owned enterprise created in 2018 (operational since 2021) to centralize the purchase and sale of artisanal cobalt, effectively formalizing a segment of the supply chain and potentially improving traceability and oversight over 15-30 percent of cobalt production. The ECG is a notable step towards reform in cobalt sourcing. Nevertheless, academic analyses caution that such formalization could unintentionally marginalize artisanal miners unless complemented by inclusive and highly contextualized policy design. More broadly, scholars analyzing supply networks find that most EU firms are only a few steps removed, typically three degrees of separation, from nodes where forced or child labor may occur.
Final Thoughts on the Morality of EV Production
The environmental imperative fueling the EV revolution cannot be decoupled from the social costs inlaid within the bedrock of its supply chains, especially cobalt mining in the DRC. U.S. litigation avenues such as the ATS have proven highly constricted. However, the EU’s emerging regulatory regime may be a sign of a general shift toward enforceable corporate responsibility. Meanwhile, the DRC’s own institutional policies, including the EGC, hold the potential for better oversight, but they must be implemented very carefully to avoid further weakening of artisanal communities.
The question is no longer whether due diligence is desirable. It is rather how to operationalize it in a manner that is effective and equitable. Only under such rigorous standards can the global transition to electric mobility be legitimately deemed both green and just.