According to the Clean Clothes Campaign, it corresponded with forty-five fashion and sportswear companies, such as Zara, Next, The North Face (VF Corp.), Gap, and H&M, to persuade their Bangladeshi suppliers to withdraw the criminal accusations made against labour leaders and employees during the previous year’s minimum wage demonstrations.
The group said: “To date only a handful of brands have met this request to respect their workers’ basic human rights, by pressuring their suppliers to take action.”
The NGO added that the vast majority of brands allegedly “shirked the responsibility” by either falsely claiming that their suppliers were not involved, defending their suppliers’ filing of criminal cases, and/or denying that the charges were being used as a tool of “systematic retaliation” against workers who demonstrated for higher wages, or did not respond at all.
Many others claimed that their “sole response” was to ask the Ethical Trading Initiative (ETI) or the American Apparel and Footwear Association (AAFA) to release a joint statement on their behalf, according to the group.
In mid-March, the AAFA wrote to the Bangladesh Garment Manufacturers & Exporters Association (BGMEA) requesting a halt to the continuous detention of garment workers who are participating in protests against Bangladesh’s minimum wage, as well as the fear of detention.
Comparably, on 21st March, the ETI released a statement denouncing criminal charges against Bangladeshi labourers as well as the suppression of their right to freedom of association.
Nonetheless, the Clean Clothes Campaign contended that neither the ETI nor the AAFA had mentioned that their concerns stemmed from pressure from rights groups on behalf of their member brands. It asserted that the police, who had “filed at least six” criminal cases, were not the ones filing the majority of the 26 criminal cases, which were allegedly brought by factory owners who produced goods for AAFA and ETI member brands.
For this reason the Clean Clothes Campaign stated: “In this context, unless AAFA and ETI members require their suppliers to withdraw cases, the notes of concern ring hollow.”