Businesses admit goods are rarely produced without serious exploitation. Make your voice heard Share the article New research has found a significant gap between known modern slavery risks in supply chains and businesses' efforts to address them. Ninety-six percent of the business leaders surveyed said they found modern slavery or serious labor abuses in their supply chains over the past year. Yet, most said they could prove their supply chains were free from modern slavery. But when asked about their response, only 36% could show their assessments were having any impact. Confidence outruns evidence. The research was commissioned by the British Standards Institution (BSI) and produced in partnership with the Chartered Institute of Procurement & Supply (CIPS). A survey of senior leaders at 600 companies with more than 100 employees in the UK, Germany, France, Italy, the Netherlands and South Africa revealed a gap between what companies believe and what they can show. The industries surveyed include retail and consumer goods, food and beverage, agriculture, and pharmaceutical industries. Despite these findings, 77% of business leaders said they had enough evidence to prove their supply chains were free from modern slavery. However, the full report found that only 18% had comprehensive visibility of suppliers three or more tiers down their supply chains. In addition, over a quarter (27%) did not require suppliers to disclose their own sources. As a result, many companies cannot tell whether subcontractors or labor providers further down the chain exploit workers. Companies also struggled to prove that their checks worked. For example, only 39% of those carrying out social audits could show the audits had made an impact. Harold Pradal, president of assurance services at BSI, said: "The challenge is then being able to demonstrate impact and show that these interventions are improving outcomes for worker. The challenge is no longer whether businesses are taking action, but whether they can demonstrate that their action is driving real improvements for vulnerable workers." Debt bondage behind a job offer. The BSI report includes two cases from the UK hospitality sector, shared by the anti-slavery charity Unseen. In both cases, employers used visa debts and immigration status to control workers. A recruitment agent in Pakistan offered Manny a job as a catering manager in the UK. However, when he arrived, his employer demanded £20,000 in visa costs and threatened him with deportation. Manny took out a loan to keep his job. The report describes what happened next: "Manny was made to work washing pots and cleaning for upwards of 75 hours a week and rarely allowed breaks. He was forced to live in poor conditions on-site and was not allowed to leave the premises alone." His employer also withheld his passport and subjected him to verbal and physical abuse. Similarly, Peter came to the UK for a restaurant job. His employer claimed he owed £5,000 in visa costs and took half his salary each month. Then, after Peter paid off the supposed debt, the employer added another £10,000 and threatened to cancel his visa. After learning of violations, 54% of companies kept working with suppliers to fix them. Another 31% ended the contract, while 11% admitted their response was limited. However, these figures show what companies did, not whether workers received remedies or saw their conditions improve. Reporting modern slavery in supply chains is not protection. The UK is one of the six countries surveyed, and its law shows how this gap persists. Under Section 54 of the UK Modern Slavery Act, large companies must publish an annual modern slavery statement. However, the law carries no penalties for non-compliance. In 2019, an independent review recommended closing this loophole. Statements and audits also miss where exploitation often begins. The risk starts long before a worker reaches the workplace. It starts when brokers demand fees and workers take on debts that can trap them in debt bondage. Take action and demand laws that require businesses to prevent and eliminate exploitation in their supply chains, not just report on it. Freedom United is interested in hearing from its community and welcomes relevant, informed comments, advice, and insights that advance the conversation around its campaigns and advocacy. Freedom United value inclusivity and respect within its community. To be approved, your comments should be civil. A few things Freedom United do not tolerate: comments that promote discrimination, prejudice, racism, or xenophobia, as well as personal attacks or profanity. Freedom United screen submissions in order to create a space where the entire Freedom United community feels safe to express and exchange thoughtful opinions. Most Voted Companies seek competitive supply chains competing with other companies to attract customers seeking to buy items at the lowest cost, be that food, fast fashion or other items. State and unions promote and pursue a 'living wage' for UK workers, if everyone in the supply chain did the same, prices would sky rocket. People want quality or 'reasonably' priced items, they have no perception of what the true value of the item they want without MDS. Demanding competitive prices can lead to complicity. This week. A new UN report has concluded that Russia has committed war crimes, crimes against humanity, and human trafficking during its invasion of Ukraine - including the trafficking of men from 29 countries to fight on the frontlines. Men from vulnerable communities trafficked to fight The UN's Independent International Commission of Inquiry on Ukraine found that Russian authorities coordinated with agents "operating around the world" to recruit men aged 18... | Tuesday October 27, 2026

Huawei Organisations across 14 European countries achieve ISO 37001 certification, strengthening industry trust through international standards and independent assessment. 19 October 2026 BSI presents ISO 37001 certificates and the Compliance Governance Excellence Award to Huawei at HUAWEI CONNECT 2026 · FLORENCE. During HUAWEI CONNECT 2026 · FLORENCE, BSI (British Standards Institution) presented ISO 37001 Anti-Bribery Management Systems certificates to Huawei organisations across 14 European countries and presented Huawei Group with the Compliance Governance Excellence Award. During the event, Harold Pradal, President of BSI Assurance Services, delivered a keynote speech titled "From Compliance Trends to Trust: Integrity in a Changing World." He highlighted that international standards provide a common framework for responsible business conduct, while independent third-party assessments help strengthen stakeholder confidence, foster industry collaboration, and promote sustainable development. Huawei's ISO 37001 certification program across 14 European countries adopts international standards as a common framework, with BSI conducting independent third-party assessments of the relevant organizations' anti-bribery management systems. The Compliance Governance Excellence Award, presented by BSI to Huawei Group, recognizes Huawei's sustained investment and achievements in developing compliance management systems aligned with industry best practices and enhancing its global compliance governance capabilities. For multinational ICT businesses, the certification program provides telecommunications operators, enterprise customers, and business partners with independent third-party assessment information on the anti-bribery management systems of the relevant Huawei organisations and how these systems operate. This helps strengthen industry trust and supports long-term business cooperation. James Chen, Chief Compliance Officer of Huawei Group, stated: "Conducting business with integrity, upholding business ethics, and complying with relevant applicable laws and regulations have long been the core principles followed by Huawei." He explained that through continuous investment, Huawei is committed to establishing a compliance management system that aligns with industry best practices, and incorporating compliance management into end-to-end business activities and processes. Huawei will continue cultivating a culture of integrity and asks that all employees adhere to the Employee Business Conduct Guidelines. James Chen further stated: "Compliance is a shared responsibility across the entire business ecosystem. A healthy, open, and sustainable business environment requires the collective efforts of all stakeholders. Huawei looks forward to working with BSI, customers, and partners to strengthen industry trust through integrity and compliance, and jointly build a sustainable business ecosystem."

BSI launches AI assurance schemes spanning biometrics, LLMs and risk management. New BSI schemes cover biometric AI compliance, LLM performance and product risk management as demand for independent assurance grows The British Standards Institution (BSI) has launched three AI assessment schemes covering high-risk biometric systems, large language models and product-level AI risk management. The schemes, announced October 14, add to a growing market for independent evidence that AI products are safe, reliable and fit for purpose. BSI cites FocalData research finding that 67 percent of business leaders would trust AI tools more if they were validated by an external organization. Its own research found that only a quarter of business leaders had a formal AI governance program, and just 28 percent knew what data sources were used to train or deploy their AI models. Independent assessment is becoming a commercial requirement as well as a regulatory one. Buyers, investors and insurers increasingly want third-party evidence that AI products perform as claimed and their risks are managed. For some high-risk systems under the EU AI Act, third-party conformity assessment is a condition of market access. For others, independent assessment can support procurement, due diligence and governance. Assessment 1: Conformity assessment for high-risk biometric AI. The first scheme targets biometric AI systems classified as high risk under Annex III, point 1 of the EU AI Act, including remote biometric identification, certain biometric categorization systems and emotion recognition. Biometric verification used solely to confirm that someone is who they claim to be is excluded from this category. The assessment follows the Act's Annex VII procedure, including review of technical documentation, the provider's quality management system and, where applicable, model capabilities and datasets. BSI says a positive assessment results in a Union technical documentation assessment certificate and an Article 17 attestation. BSI is launching the biometric AI service as a pilot while working toward designation as an AI Act Notified Body. Until that designation is granted, the service supports preparation for conformity assessment rather than providing the formal regulatory certification. The EU's AI Omnibus has meanwhile moved the deadline for Annex III high-risk requirements from August 2, 2026 to December 2, 2027. Assessment 2: Performance testing for LLM applications. The second scheme independently tests whether an implemented LLM application performs as intended. The AI Performance Assessment for Large Language Models covers applications including chatbots, retrieval-augmented generation systems and summarization tools. Testing can measure answer correctness, factual consistency, contextual relevance, toxicity and summarization quality. The focus is the finished application rather than only the underlying foundation model, capturing the effects of an organization's own data, prompts, retrieval systems and guardrails. Customers receive an independent evaluation of results, strengths and areas for improvement that can support deployment, procurement, governance and customer assurance. Assessment 3: Product-level AI risk management. The third scheme assesses how effectively risks associated with a specific AI product, model, module or system are identified, controlled and managed. The AI Risk Management Assessment is based on the NIST AI Risk Management Framework and ISO/IEC 23894. It targets products that do not require mandatory third-party conformity assessment but whose developers want independent evidence of responsible risk management. Successful organizations receive a certificate referencing the two frameworks, a technical assessment report and the BSI Mark of Trust. The assessment does not replace regulatory conformity assessment. Together with BSI's existing ISO/IEC 42001 certification for organizational AI management systems, the three services span organizational governance, product risk, technical performance and regulatory preparation. "Having led the way in the development of AI standards, BSI is committed to enabling AI's adoption for good and is now expanding our offer to help AI providers demonstrate trust in their AI," said Omkar Joshi, managing director of AI and Digital Solutions at BSI. "Our ambition is to help organisations assure the AI stack end-to-end," Joshi said. "Combined, the schemes we are launching provide independent assurance across the AI stack, helping organisations build trust from model performance to market access." Competition grows in AI assurance. BSI is entering a growing field. DEKRA announced in March that the Dutch Accreditation Council had accredited it to conduct conformity assessments for the same three categories of biometric AI systems. Like BSI, DEKRA has not announced designation as an AI Act Notified Body. SGS offers gap analysis, technical testing and conformity assessment support. TÜV SÜD provides technical documentation reviews, gap assessments and voluntary conformity assessments, while TÜV Rheinland offers AI testing, CE-marking preparation and management system services. CNLABS and TÜV AI.Lab are also developing technical validation methods and assessment frameworks. These services are not interchangeable. A readiness assessment, technical test or voluntary certificate is not the same as the third-party conformity assessment required under the AI Act for systems subject to that route. Should companies get their AI products certified? For products subject to mandatory third-party conformity assessment, the answer is straightforward: certification is part of market access. For other AI products, the decision depends on the business need. Independent assessment makes the strongest case when it satisfies customer or procurement requirements, supports due diligence, demonstrates product performance or provides buyers with credible evidence that AI risks are being managed. The type of assurance should match the question being asked. LLM testing demonstrates performance; product-level assessment demonstrates risk management; ISO/IEC 42001 addresses organizational AI governance; and regulatory conformity assessment demonstrates compliance with applicable legal requirements. As more AI assurance services enter the market, organizations should ask four questions: What is being assessed, against which requirements, who is performing the assessment, and what will the resulting certificate actually be recognized for? The question is therefore less whether an AI product should be certified, and more what assurance customers and regulators need, and which assessment provides credible evidence of it. Article topics. Latest biometrics news. Oct 22, 2026, 3:51 pm EDT The UK's Department for Culture, Media and Sport (DCMS) and Office for Digital Identities & Attributes (OfDIA) have published the... Oct 22, 2026, 3:09 pm EDT Police in France are using facial recognition and images collected from social media to investigate the looting and violence that... Oct 22, 2026, 2:48 pm EDT Swiss citizens will be able to apply for a new biometric identity card alongside the existing non-biometric card, under a... Oct 22, 2026, 1:40 pm EDT Somalia's National Identification and Registration Authority (NIRA) has begun issuing biometric national ID cards to citizens returning from Yemen to... Oct 22, 2026, 1:27 pm EDT Uganda is moving ahead with plans to use its National Identification Number (NIN) as the tax identifier for individuals, integrating... Oct 22, 2026, 12:53 pm EDT San Francisco-based identity verification company Persona has launched an open research grant program offering up to $100,000 per award for...