Blood Diamonds and the Kimberley Process: Can We Really Guarantee Anything?
The diamond industry promises transparency. But who verifies the truth?
For me, a responsible diamond purchase starts with separating what someone promises from what the documentation actually shows. Words such as conflict-free, ethical and traceable need to be explained—not simply repeated.
What the Kimberley Process covers
The Kimberley Process regulates international trade in rough diamonds. Its definition of conflict diamonds covers rough diamonds used by rebel movements or their allies to finance armed conflict against legitimate governments. Polished diamonds do not require a Kimberley certificate.
My conclusion is that compliance with this system does not, by itself, answer every question about working conditions, environmental impact or human rights. These are different questions that require different evidence.
An assurance is not proof
The System of Warranties relies on companies passing written assurances along the supply chain. But a statement on an invoice is not, by itself, independent proof of where your particular diamond came from or under what conditions it was mined.
The key question is: Has the seller checked the origin—or is the seller simply repeating what the previous supplier promised?
Supplier assurances can form part of the documentation. But if the supporting evidence cannot be shown and linked to the stone, we should say so openly. We should not call a diamond “fully traceable” or promise an ethical origin simply because those words appear on an invoice.
Honesty also means saying: This is what we know. This is what we have documentation for. And this is what we cannot verify.
Grading is not the same as origin
GIA distinguishes between a standard Diamond Grading Report and a Diamond Origin Report. The latter also includes identification of the country of origin. So check which report type is actually available. A grading report should not be presented as a general guarantee of ethical conditions.
Blockchain can preserve records—but it cannot guarantee the truth
Blockchain is often presented as the solution to traceability problems in the diamond industry. The technology can make recorded information harder to change later. But it cannot determine, on its own, whether the information was accurate when it was entered.
If the wrong origin is recorded at the start, storing that information on a blockchain does not make it true.
The key issue is the link between the physical diamond and the digital record. Who identified the stone? Who checked its origin? How is its identity maintained through sorting, trading and cutting? And who checks that the stone has not been confused with or replaced by another?
A digital record can be a useful tool when combined with reliable identification, documentation and checks. But the word “blockchain” is not, by itself, proof of ethical origin, good working conditions or complete traceability.
We should assess the chain of evidence—not be impressed by the name of the technology.
What I want to be able to tell a customer
- What do we know about this particular stone?
- Which documents support that information?
- Who has checked them?
- What remains unclear?
I want to be able to explain both the evidence and its limits. We should not promise more than we can show.
— Orloff
Sources
Sources checked 16 October 2026. Conclusions and guidance reflect Orloff’s editorial assessment.