We asked Shakhzoda Kuchkarova, who handles media enquiries for Indorama Agro in Uzbekistan, how the company was addressing the issues raised in its own Labour Assessment report 2024 and she told us: “Indorama Agro, like any other world class organisation, believes in doing a reality check with third party auditors to assess the ground realities from time to time.Very few companies dare to do this, since it is easier to stay in a ‘comfort zone’ with eyes closed. Once the gap areas are identified, Indorama Agro has a robust internal mechanism where a time bound action plan is created and the non-conformities are closed.”
Dumitrescu says problems can easily be remediated with proper workers’ rights, and that brands have the power to pressure Uzbekistan – the government wants international markets.
Kuchkarova told us that the company’s trade unions had 1,500 members, and that the transition of some workers to “service provider status” complied with “IFC PS2 / EBRD PR2 processes and Uzbek labour legislation”, reviewed by legal experts.
She also said workers were consulted, alongside trade unions, to ensure “the service providers fully understood the implications of the transition, including their rights and responsibilities under the new arrangement”. She added: “Service providers can still advocate for their interests through industry associations (eg hoteliers association, contractors association, etc).”
The compliance complaint about Indorama submitted to EBRD’s Independent Project Accountability Mechanism (IPAM) in 2023 remains open, with specifics hidden due to concerns over retaliation.
These related to land confiscation, loss of livelihoods, failure to pay compensation, violation of labour rights, obstruction of freedom of association and collective bargaining, health and safety, exploitation of farmers, pollution and lack of stakeholder engagement.
Kuchkarova told us that the company had management systems and respected national laws, as well as being “checked and approved” by international financial institutions like IFC, EBRD and ADB.
She told Ecotextile News: “We believe the IPAM complaint is prejudiced. We have a strong employee, society and stakeholder engagement process, and Indorama Agro is committed to execute them as per the highest standards.”
Lynn Schweisfurth, of Uzbek Forum for Human Rights, told us: “IPAM is currently finalising its compliance assessment and, given the overwhelming evidence of serious, systemic rights violations and retaliations, we expect it to proceed to an investigation.“ (see update below)
The IPAM compliance review has been initiated and is expected to conclude by third quarter 2025. The compliance document appears to find several of the allegations plausible.
The compliance review document says: “Based on these initial findings … IPAM finds that upon preliminary consideration, it appears that the project may have caused, or may be likely to cause, direct or indirect and material harm to the requesters.”
Asked about how Indorama would like to see the cotton and textiles sector reformed to resolve labour problems in cotton and textiles in Uzbekistan, and also how the country was preparing to meet due diligence requirements, Kuchkarova commented: “The cotton and textile sector provides more than 400,000 jobs and is one of the largest employment providers in Uzbekistan. The sector the has potential to double its revenues (and the jobs which come along with it) through mechanisation, yield improvement programmes and value addition.
“Indorama Agro is extremely proud of the work that we have been doing in the space of agriculture, cotton sector and the society in Uzbekistan.”
In Turkmenistan the situation is also concerning. We spoke to Ruslan Myatiev, of Turkmen News, who was recently refused entry to Turkey because, he says, of his protests about forced labour in Turkmenistan, and that this was done at the Turkmen government request.
He describes a “Soviet times” situation, with tens of thousands of state employees forced to pick cotton, including teachers, doctors, bank and utility staff.
“They have to pick, or pay someone to pick from their own pockets,” he says. Those who refuse can find “a living hell”, with teachers who refuse to pick cotton, for example, subjected to endless inspections.
Meawnhile, those who agree to work in the fields might find they spend “three weeks sleeping in schools, on floors, and cooking on open fires or over pits”. Similar concerns were recorded last year. Myatiev says farmers barely make ends meet because of the cost of seeds and pesticides, and many end up in debt to the government.
Turkmenistan does not publish cotton statistics, Myatiev adds, but looking at information from importing country databases or the UN shows that in 2021 Turkey was the biggest importer of Turkmen cotton. Others include Italy, Spain, Portugal, Poland, and Germany. The Cotton Campaign claims Turkmenistan is the 10th largest cotton producer worldwide (USDA statistics would put it around 13th, with exports worth $300 million.
Myatiev claims the government does not acknowledge the problem despite being in its second year of working with the International Labour Organization (ILO) on a roadmap to eradicate forced labour. He wants western buyers to investigate their supply chains, arguing the situation is “similar to Xinjiang” and that companies “should ban Turkmen cotton, sending a clear message that none will be taken until policies are changed”. He argues for collective bargaining rights for workers, and for autonomy for farmers.
This is an updated version of part of Simon Ferrigno’s Cotton Horizons column in the latest issue of our Ecotextile News magazine – out now.
