The World Federation of Diamond Bourses (WFDB), CIBJO (the World Jewellery Confederation) and the International Diamond Manufacturers Association (IDMA) have issued a statement to members outlining a new procedure that would be undertaken in the event of a diamond grade being questioned.
The new framework acknowledged the Gemological Institute of America (GIA) and the International Diamond Council’s (IDC’s) colour settings and nomenclature as the “industry-accepted standards”.
Under the policy, suspicious diamonds would be brought before the authorised body of a diamond bourse for further assessment. The authorised body would be required to submit the questionable stone to a “leading, respected laboratory or to three recognised expert gemmologists or diamantaires”.
The WFDB declined to comment on the names of specific laboratories, gemmologists or diamantaires that would be deemed acceptable.
If an independent examination confirmed that the diamond differed from the industry benchmark by more than one grade, it was said that “all necessary measures [would] be taken, including possible disciplinary actions”.
No hiding
Although the policy was only enforceable within the three association memberships, WFDB president Ernie Blom called for industry-wide support of the new practice – from rough and polished diamond manufacturers through to jewellery retailers.
“This policy statement makes it quite clear that there will be no hiding place for labs that break the rules,” he said. “Doing so cheats members of the diamond and jewellery industries, but it also could have a disastrous effect on consumer confidence. We must not only talk about the importance of consumer confidence, but show the steps we are taking to defend it.”
When asked what types of disciplinary action might be taken, Blom told Jeweller, “All options are available: from the reversing of the transaction to expulsion from the bourse – all depending, of course, on the severity of the offence.”
He also confirmed that while the current policy only related to colour grading, the associations were investigating the potential of including an additional clause to limit the clarity grading difference to one degree.
“We have a very specific aim of protecting the integrity of the industry and upholding consumer confidence,” Blom said. “We have zero tolerance for illegal and fraudulent actions.”
The full statement issued to members can be viewed here.
More reading
Diamond grading reports banned
Industry called to fight diamond over-grading
Diamond grading furore continues; ‘approved’ lab list released
Diamond grading games: the search for consumer confidence
Diamond challenges brought to the fore