U.S. Rights Group Sues Apple Over Alleged Use of Congo Conflict Minerals
GeokHub
Contributing Writer
WASHINGTON, Nov 26, 2025 — A U.S.-based advocacy group has filed a lawsuit against Apple, accusing the tech giant of using minerals sourced from regions linked to armed conflict and human rights abuses in the Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC) and Rwanda.
The complaint alleges that Apple’s supply chain continues to include cobalt, tin, tantalum, and tungsten — materials believed to be connected to forced labor, child labor, and armed groups in mining areas. The lawsuit does not seek monetary compensation but calls for a legal declaration that Apple’s practices violate consumer protection laws, along with an injunction to prevent what the group describes as “deceptive marketing.”
The advocacy group cites studies indicating the presence of forced and child labor at Congolese mining sites linked to suppliers in Apple’s supply chain. The organization also highlights concerns over smelters processing minerals from conflict-affected areas, potentially contributing to ongoing human rights violations.
Trend
Pentagon Proposes Adding Alibaba, Baidu, BYD to List of Companies Supporting China’s Military
Apple responded by stating that it has no reasonable basis to believe any smelters or refiners in its supply chain directly or indirectly fund armed groups. The company emphasized that a significant portion of the cobalt used in its products comes from recycled sources and highlighted ongoing efforts to improve traceability and ensure ethical sourcing.
Why This Lawsuit Matters
This legal action brings renewed attention to the sourcing of “conflict minerals” — including tin, tungsten, tantalum, and cobalt — used extensively in electronics. Mining in the DRC has long been associated with human rights abuses and the funding of armed conflict.
If successful, the lawsuit could set a precedent requiring companies to demonstrate that their supply chains are free from minerals sourced through violence, forced labor, or child labor. It also underscores the increasing scrutiny on multinational corporations to maintain transparent and ethical supply chains.
For consumers and investors, the case raises ethical considerations around purchasing products potentially tied to human rights abuses, emphasizing the growing importance of corporate accountability in global supply chains.
