The appointment of India as Chair of the Kimberley Process (KP) for 2026 has drawn unease from several African diamond-producing countries, particularly amid ongoing governance and reform challenges facing the certification framework.

African producing nations, responsible for a substantial share of global rough diamond supply, had collectively pushed for an African-led chairmanship. The African Diamond Producers Association (ADPA) maintained that a producing-country chair would more accurately reflect upstream concerns, including income security during market volatility, national interests in reform negotiations, and protections for mining-dependent communities.

These issues came to the forefront during the KP plenary held in Dubai in November 2025, where discussions aimed at updating the conflict diamond definition failed to reach agreement. Proposals backed by African members, including measures to broaden the definition to encompass state actors, did not secure consensus. The meeting ended without progress on several agenda items and without naming a chair for 2026.

Dr M’zée Fula Ngenge of the African Diamond Council (ADC) observed that India’s elevation places a dominant polishing and trading centre — handling close to 90 percent of global rough diamonds — at the head of the process. He stated that “the outcome shifts focus toward downstream considerations such as access to rough supply and supply chain continuity, rather than addressing pressures confronting producing countries.”

Although Ghana was confirmed as Vice-Chair for 2026 and Chair-in-Waiting for 2027, India’s appointment through an extraordinary written procedure in December 2025 has reinforced perceptions that producer-country preferences were ultimately overridden.