The Diamond Collective, aka The Natural Diamond Council, represents the diamond industry.

Then as a matter of fact, African diamond mining interests often run afoul and against the interests of U.S. consumers.

The Diamond Collective is the new public identity of the Natural Diamond Council, formerly the Diamond Producers Association. Although it presents itself as a broad industry organization, its UK corporate filings identify De Beers UK Limited as a “Person with Significant Control,” specifically on the basis that De Beers exercises “significant influence or control” over the organization.

De Beers has also historically been its dominant funder. The organization's new governance model gives enhanced voting rights to larger contributors, with contributors of at least $4 million receiving “A” voting rights. De Beers committed $8 million in the latest disclosed funding round. Angola's ENDIAMA and SODIAM have also committed a combined $8 million and now hold two board seats. ProPublica The organization's U.S. entity reported $22.7m of 2024 revenue, illustrating just how large those two commitments are relative to its recent operating scale. In 2023, the Natural Diamond Council also appointed De Beers' Chief Brand Officer as chairman of its board. [Natural Diamond Council — Companies House filing history; Natural Diamond Council — Companies House company record]

Thus, while The Diamond Collective has broadened its membership, De Beers remains the only entity presently identified in the UK corporate register as exercising significant influence or control over the legal entity.

Now De Beers does not have a clean U.S. law record, not even in recent decades. They have been criminally indicted and paid maximum penalties as recently as 2004.

On February 17, 1994, a U.S. federal grand jury criminally indicted De Beers Centenary AG under §1 of the Sherman Act. This wasn't merely a civil antitrust complaint. The DOJ classifies the proceeding as a criminal case for horizontal price fixing.

De Beers initially wasn't tried because the U.S. court lacked jurisdiction over the Swiss company. A decade later, on July 13, 2004, De Beers Centenary AG pleaded guilty. According to the DOJ, De Beers admitted reaching agreements with its co-conspirator to raise list prices and admitted that its representatives exchanged detailed future pricing information. The court imposed the then-maximum $10 million criminal fine. [DOJ: De Beers guilty plea and $10 million criminal fine]