Australian retailer giant accused of sourcing from factories exploiting Uyghur forced labour

SYDNEY, Australia (MNTV) – An Australia-based Uyghur group has filed a lawsuit against Kmart retail chain in the Federal Court seeking to gain documents so they can see whether it knowingly sourced stock from suppliers who they claim used forced labour from those in the ethnic group.

But the retail giant has defended its sourcing program, saying regular monitoring is conducted through site visits and audit programs, reports SBS News.

Kmart is facing accusations that it misled customers on its ethical credentials by allegedly sourcing clothing supplies from factories in China with links to slave labour.

In its ethical sourcing statement, Kmart said it aimed to provide products that respected human rights according to its ethical sourcing code, which committed to abiding by international standards, including guidelines set out in the United Nations Universal Declaration of Human Rights.

The lawsuit, filed by the Australian Uyghur Tangritagh Women’s Association, claims Kmart included on its 2024 and 2025 factory lists two suppliers that they claim have links to the Chinese occupied Eastern Turkistan region officially called Xinjiang Uyghur Autonomous Region.

It said this region in China’s west has been well-documented for “systemic state-sponsored forced labour and other atrocities against Uyghur and other Turkic Muslim people”.

The group wants proof from Kmart that it has abided by its ethical sourcing promises regarding these suppliers and whether its public statements have been deceptive.

Kmart must ensure it is not profiting off forced labour in China, association president Ramila Chanisheff said.

“We’re demanding answers from Kmart so we know whether its actions live up to its words about addressing forced labour risks in its supply chain,” she said.

Jennifer Kanis, principal lawyer for law firm Maurice Blackburn, who are representing the Uyghur group, said the firm was using this first-of-its-kind case to bring real accountability to Australian retailers.

Kanis said that the lawsuit’s allegation that there were links between the factories and the use of Uyghur forced labour was, in their view, in opposition to Kmart’s position that it “supports ethical sourcing and the protection of human rights”.

Human Rights Law Centre associate legal director Freya Dinshaw said the case highlighted the weaknesses in Australia’s laws when members of the public are left to take companies to court on suspicions of modern slavery.

Unlike the United States, Australia has not banned imports of products made in Xinjiang, also called East Turkestan, instead opting for a transparency approach that requires businesses to report annually on their actions to identify and address slavery risks.