Regional Due Diligence Over Tariffs for Labor Rights

The debate over how to address forced labor in the Asia-Pacific region is increasingly focused on the limitations of trade protectionism. While tariffs have been proposed as a tool to deter exploitative practices, experts suggest they are unlikely to resolve the issue for the estimated 15 million workers affected across the region. Instead, a more effective approach involves implementing robust due diligence laws that require companies to actively verify and address risks in their supply chains, regardless of the outcome of current trade court proceedings.

According to GN geopolitics/rights (en-US), the prevailing view among policy experts is that disclosure-based frameworks are insufficient without the threat of meaningful consequences. The region’s diverse political landscapes and varying institutional capacities make a one-size-fits-all tariff strategy impractical. A collaborative, enforcement-driven model is seen as a more realistic path to improving conditions for workers in sectors such as fishing and manufacturing, where exploitation remains deeply embedded.

Limitations of Disclosure-Only Frameworks

Australia’s experience with its Modern Slavery Act highlights the shortcomings of reporting requirements that lack enforcement power. Although the law required companies to report on modern slavery in their supply chains, it did not impose financial or criminal penalties for inadequate filings. Recent recommendations from Australia’s Anti-Slavery Commissioner emphasize the need to move beyond simple disclosure to mandatory due diligence, a conclusion reached before recent US tariff measures were imposed.

This shift reflects a broader recognition that polished reports often fail to translate into tangible improvements on the ground. Without the ability to enforce compliance, companies may prioritize public relations over operational changes. The focus is therefore moving toward binding obligations that require entities to identify and remediate risks, extending beyond immediate suppliers to include second-tier subcontractors as institutional capacity allows.

Verification Through Technology and Audits

To move from attestation to verification, experts propose integrating remote auditing technologies into compliance frameworks. Satellite-based vessel monitoring, for instance, can flag fishing vessels operating without required tracking, providing data that in-person audits alone cannot match. This technological approach allows for the identification of high-risk regions and sectors, enabling authorities to target unannounced audits more effectively.

The European Union’s Forced Labour Regulation serves as a potential reference point for such measures, demonstrating how binding regulations can be structured to ensure accountability. By combining traditional auditing with digital monitoring, governments can create a more comprehensive oversight mechanism. This hybrid model addresses the geographic and logistical challenges of verifying labor conditions across vast and diverse supply chains.

Enforcement and Regional Collaboration

Effective enforcement requires consequences for non-compliance, ranging from public disclosure and procurement blacklisting to fines and criminal penalties. Given the uneven enforcement capacity across the Asia-Pacific, strategies must be scalable and adaptable. Working with non-governmental organizations and other countries implementing due diligence requirements can help build local capacity and share best practices.

Looking ahead, the critical question is whether regional bodies like ASEAN can facilitate joint implementation of these standards where unilateral action is not feasible. The next steps will likely involve testing these enforcement mechanisms in high-risk sectors, with a focus on creating a transparent and accountable framework that prioritizes worker safety over trade volume.