Skip to main content

In August 2021 Ethical Consumer searched and found that it only sold audiobooks. The company therefore was not rated for supply chain management. This reference is for information only.

Reference: website (12 July 2021)

In February 2021 Ethical Consumer viewed an article on the Financial News website dated 26th November 2019 and titled "Critics say KKR’s ‘responsible investment’ stance is clouded by tear-gas maker".

It reported: "In April 2018, KKR’s corporate credit arm entered into an investment advisory partnership that included oversight of a debt and equity stake in a producer of tear gas, anti-riot bullets and other crowd-control gear. The tear gas produced by Safariland’s brands have been used against demonstrators in Puerto Rico, Turkey and even in America over the past decade, according to news reports and researchers. Under its partnership with FS Investments, KKR continues to manage two Safariland loans valued at around $121m and more than $6m of equity, which represents at least 5% of the company’s equity, based on company filings."

It further stated: "'Patrick Wilcken, arms-control researcher at Amnesty International, says Safariland should monitor how their products can be abused by police, and cease sales if they find they cannot mitigate the human rights risks. By extension, responsible investors should be assessing and monitoring human rights risks associated with their financial support and not entering into partnerships where these risks cannot be prevented or mitigated,' he said in emailed comments."

As a result the company lost half a mark under Human Rights.


Critics say KKR’s ‘responsible investment’ stance is clouded by tear-gas maker (26 November 2019)

In November 2021 Ethical Consumer viewed KKR and Co Inc’s SEC Filling Form 10-K for the year ending 31st December 2020. It stated that the company had subsidiaries located in Saudi Arabia, Mexico and China.

The portfolio list on the KKR website also featured two companies located in the Philippines (First Gen Corporation, Voyager and Pinnacle Towers Pte).

At the time of writing Ethical Consumer considered these jurisdictions to be governed by oppressive regimes.

As a result the company lost half a mark under Human Rights.


Generic ref 2021: (17 May 2021)