Support genocide-free investing


Investors Against Genocide is leading a national campaign to make sure mutual funds do not make investments that contribute to genocide. We have submitted shareholder proposals to many mutual funds that ask the mutual funds to make a commitment to be genocide-free.  Over time, as awareness grows and more ordinary investors vote their proxies according to their values, we are confident that the movement for genocide-free investing will succeed. With your support we will make it happen.
  • Click here to learn about genocide-free investing
  • Click here to see mutual funds that have a genocide-free investing proposal pending
  • Click here for a brief history of genocide-free investing
  • Click here for a one page flyer on the campaign for genocide-free investing

Submitting a shareholder proposal for genocide-free investing


Please join the campaign for genocide-free investing. We've made it easy to help. 
  • We are looking for volunteers to submit a shareholder proposal, which we have drafted, to ask mutual funds and investment companies to stop investing in genocide.  
  • Once you've done the submission, we will do the rest of the work, contacting the investment firm, defending the proposal against challenges, and presenting the proposal at shareholder meetings.
  • View a generic sample of the Genocide-Free Investing Shareholder Proposal.  Note that this image is a sample only, since we customize and update the supporting text as appropriate for each submission.
  • Contact us at info@InvestorsAgainstGenocide.org if you can volunteer to submit a proposal.  Note that we welcome your submission even if one of your funds already has a submission pending.
The SEC requires that shareholders own at least $2,000 worth of shares in a fund (or company) to file a shareholder proposal. In addition, you must have held at least $2,000 worth for at least one year.

For each mutual fund (or investment firm) here's all you would need to do:
  • Edit the text of the letter and shareholder proposal (that we will provide on request) to include your information in the highlighted areas.
  • Print and sign the letter.
  • Attach a copy of a financial statement from the investment firm (or whatever agent administers your account) showing that you’ve held at least $2,000 worth of that fund for at least one year.
  • Send the letter, the shareholder proposal, and the copy of the statement(s) to the investment firm by certified mail.  We'll do the research to determine the correct mailing address.
  • Send a copy of the cover letter to us. (There is no need to send us a copy of your financial statement or any confidential information about you or your accounts.)

Our shareholder proposal strategy

  • The proposal does not need to be approved in order to be successful. Rather, we hope to begin dialog with investment companies and gain constructive press. We will submit the proposal to as many funds as possible, so that it will be discussed with one fund or another, as soon as possible, even if the fund is not currently holding shares of PetroChina, Sinopec, ONGC, or Petronas. It is not a problem if the same proposal is filed by more than one shareholder; multiple co-filers are welcome and help with our goals.
  • The proposal is based on asking the Board of Directors of mutual funds and investment firms to commit to genocide-free investing.  This forward-looking statement applies to investments in Sudan, which fund the genocide in Darfur, as an example of the general principle. This generalized approach, rather than merely proposing to "divest from PetroChina," raises a "significant social policy issue" and addresses concerns that if we submitted a narrowly focused proposals it would interfere with ordinary business decisions that are "fundamental to management's ability to run a company on a day-to-day basis." Presenting the proposal in general terms allows it to be applied to crises and with other specific problem companies that may occur in the future.
  • One reason for the rejection of a shareholder proposal is that it is judged as too vague for it to be followed. Our call for divesting from companies that "substantially contribute to genocide, patterns of extraordinary and egregious violations of human rights, or crimes against humanity" covers situations we care about but avoids the flaw of vagueness by leaving it up to the fund/company's Board to determine when these conditions apply. In this structure, we take the risk that the fund/company may not agree with us on a given genocide, but they will not be able to ignore the issue as they do today and will recognize the need to defend such decisions.
  • The terms "genocide" and "crimes against humanity" are defined under international law.  In reading the definitions, one can easily see why our proposal calls genocide and crimes against humanity "the most egregious violations of human rights."  "Genocide" was first defined in international law by the United Nations Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide, December 9, 1948.  The definition of "genocide" was included in the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court as Article 6, along with the definition of "crimes against humanity" as Article 7, July 17, 1998.
  • We deliberately set the bar very low by only asking the fund to deal with the very worst and most extreme human rights problems. We currently have a situation where there are socially responsible funds at one extreme and those, like Fidelity, that admit only to profits and following the law as constraints. On a scale where an SRI firm such as Calvert might be 100 and Fidelity is now 0, we seek to move Fidelity to 5. Focusing on only the most basic ethical level makes it as easy as possible to gain acceptance while still giving shareholders a basis for future discussions of ethics. Thus, we deliberately excluded requirements for applying external standards (e.g., basing implementation on UN or US State Department ruling of genocide) and for reporting to shareholders. We want to avoid giving ammunition to opponents of the proposal and to force the companies to defend an untenable position if they reject the proposal.
  • The discussion section of the genocide-free investing proposal makes clear that the proposal relates to existing Darfur divestment targets and clarifies the conditions under which engagement is appropriate. Engagement was excluded from the resolution statement to keep the language simple and retain the focus on future investments.
  • The argument presented by the proposal is based on moral and ethical considerations. Clearly, it would be stronger based on legal constraints, however there are none that apply or we would not need to have the discussion with investment firms about investing in companies that substantially contribute to genocide.

The shareholder meeting


Most US mutual funds are not required to hold annual shareholder meetings. Once a shareholder proposal is pending, it will have to be considered when the fund does schedule a shareholder meeting, for whatever purpose. It will be a good thing to have many instances of this shareholder proposal pending and better yet when funds plan their meetings and need to address the proposals. When the shareholder meeting is finally scheduled, someone must personally appear at the meeting to present the proposal.  We will attend the meeting and present the proposal as your proxy.  We would be delighted to have you join us and attend, too, but there is no requirement that you travel to the meeting.

Background on shareholder proposals


A shareholder proposal is a shareholder's request that a company or fund take an action relevant to company policy. Shareholder proposals can be useful tools as part of an overall campaign to influence management regardless of whether they are passed. In our case, submitting shareholder proposals can help get our message out to all the shareholders and get management to address or take a stand on our concern.

The Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) regulates the process by which a shareholder has a right to introduce formal proposals, have the proposals circulated to all the company's shareholders, have a vote on the proposal, and present it in person at company annual meetings. Shareholder proposals must be filed in advance of a company's annual meeting. The challenge for mutual fund investors is that mutual funds need not hold "annual" meetings as do corporations. Therefore, proposals must be filed in advance so that if and when a meeting is held, the mutual fund must place the proposal before the shareholders.

Proposals must be carefully worded and can be no longer than 500 words The SEC allows companies to omit shareholder proposals for a number of reasons. For example, a company can omit a proposal that deals with the ordinary business operations of the company or if the proposal is similar to proposals in prior years that did not receive a certain number of votes. Care must therefore be taken to ensure that proposals are not omitted on technical grounds.

Contact us


If you have questions or concerns, including any details of the text of the shareholder proposal, please contact us.