The senior lawyer with clothing retailer Shein was yesterday accused of ‘wilful ignorance’ as she faced MPs’ questions on supply chains.
Solicitor Yinan Zhu, Shein’s European general counsel, appeared before the House of Commons business and trade committee and faced questions about whether the company sources cotton from China.
The issue has been highlighted by human rights lawyers ahead of Shein’s planned flotation on the London Stock Exchange, with questions about labour practices in China’s north west Xinjiang region.
During a tense opening exchange with committee chair Liam Byrne, Zhu repeatedly refused to clarify whether Shein sourced cotton from China. Instead she asked the committee whether she could provide a written response after the hearing.
The committee was told last week that its members received a dossier from claimant firm Leigh Day, which is leading a legal challenge to Shein’s listing and which alleges there is a high likelihood of forced labour in the supply chain.
MP Antonia Bance told Zhu that, as a solicitor registered in England and Wales, she could be held criminally liable if the company was found to be breaching the law. Zhu replied: ‘I have reviewed the documents and the materials that have been sent to us and we have obviously experts who work in this area. We have reviewed in full. This is about international supply chain risks in general, not about Shein specifically.’
The solicitor was able to list a number of regions in China where Shein operates but did not include Xinjiang among them.
This prompted MP Charlie Maynard to tell her: ‘Frankly I feel I don’t think you are respecting the committee at all. I find that completely ridiculous and I find it very unhelpful and disrespectful that you are here doing this… you mention every other part of China but you don’t mention Xinjiang at all and it is wilful ignorance. Do you think you are being disrespectful by being blanketly void of answers?’
Zhu replied: ‘I am doing the best I can to answer the questions.’
In response, Maynard said: ‘That is simply not true. We have asked you some very very simple questions and you are not giving us straight answers. That, I find, dismisses the point of why we are here today… You have not answered to the best of your ability. You have obfuscated wilfully.’
At the conclusion of Zhu’s evidence session, Byrne made clear he was unhappy with Zhu’s answers on behalf of Shein.
‘I have to say for a company that sells a billion pounds to UK consumers and for a company which is seeking to float on the London Stock Exchange, the committee has been pretty horrified by the lack of evidence that you have provided today,’ added Byrne.
‘You have given us almost zero confidence in the integrity of your supply chains, you can’t even tell us what your products are made from, you can’t tell us much about the conditions which workers have to work in. The reluctance to answer basic questions has frankly bordered on contempt of the committee.’
This article is now closed for comment.
14 Readers' comments