Mercedes tops Amnesty International’s human rights ranking of EV makers

A new human rights ranking conducted by Amnesty International reveals how the world’s leading electric vehicle (EV) manufacturers score on addressing human rights risks in their mineral supply chains.

These risks include potentially leaving communities exposed to exploitation, health risks and environmental harm caused by the rapid expansion of mines required for the metals used in batteries. 

In the new report, Recharge for Rights: Ranking the Human Rights Due Diligence Reporting of Leading Electric Vehicle Makers, Amnesty uses criteria based on international standards to assess human rights due diligence policies and self-reported practices of 13 major EV manufacturers, issuing each one with a scorecard.  

Internationally recognized frameworks used to mark manufacturers included the UN Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights (UNGPs), the OECD Guidelines for Multinational Enterprises, and the OECD Due Diligence Guidance for Responsible Business Conduct. 

Mixed scores

Amnesty’s scorecard, which is marked out of 90, assesses companies’ performance on criteria including commitment to human rights policies, risk identification process, supply chain mapping and reporting and remediation. 

The scorecard breaks down whether these car brands are meeting their human rights responsibilities and highlights which of them are failing to show that they are addressing human rights concerns. 

Companies assessed are headquartered in China (BYD, Geely Auto), France (Renault), Germany (BMW, Mercedes-Benz, VW Group), Japan (Mitsubishi, Nissan), Netherlands (Stellantis), South Korea (Hyundai) and the United States (Ford, General Motors, Tesla). 

None of the companies scored higher than 51 on Amnesty International’s human rights due diligence assessment, it said.

Mercedes-Benz ranked the highest (51) Tesla came in second (49) and Stellantis third (42). BYD scored the lowest, (11), followed by Mitsubishi (13) and Hyundai (21).

In terms of supply chain mapping disclosures, BYD, Geely Auto, Hyundai, General Motors, and Mitsubishi Motors scored the lowest, failing to provide detailed information about their supply chains, Amnesty International said. 

The report revealed BYD does not disclose smelter, refiner, or mine site names. Geely Auto provided only general supplier locations without specifying mineral extraction sites.  

Hyundai and Mitsubishi Motors demonstrated a similar lack of transparency, Amnesty International said, with no evidence of comprehensive supply chain mapping or mine site identification for cobalt, copper, lithium, and nickel, making it difficult for stakeholders to verify how these operations affect nearby communities. 

As global demand for battery minerals soars, the report calls for car makers to identify and mitigate human rights risks and as well as risks of abuse of Indigenous Peoples’ rights in countries where minerals are extracted such as the Democratic Republic of Congo and Philippines.  

“The huge rise in demand for the metals needed to make electric vehicle batteries is putting immense pressures on mining-affected communities,” Amnesty International’s Secretary General, Agnès Callamard said in a statement.  

“The human rights abuses tied to the extraction of energy transition minerals are alarming and pervasive and the industry’s response is sorely lacking. Communities are suffering from forced evictions, health issues caused by pollution and difficulties accessing water,” Callamard said.  

“As demand for electric vehicles increases, manufacturers must ensure people’s human rights are respected.” 

Read the full report here.