Photo: © Tim Aubry / Greenpeace/FIS

Landmark U.S. Ruling Allows Indonesians to Proceed with Lawsuit Against Bumble Bee for Forced Labor on Fishing Boats

UNITED STATES
Monday, November 17, 2025, 00:10 (GMT + 9)

Court Finds Sufficient Allegations of Abuse, Setting a New Precedent for Seafood Supply Chain Accountability

SAN DIEGO, CALIFORNIA—A U.S. federal district court in Southern California has issued a landmark judgment, allowing a group of four Indonesian fishers to proceed with their forced labor lawsuit against the major U.S. tuna brand Bumble Bee Foods LLC. The ruling, released yesterday, marks a significant moment, as the case is believed to be the first of its kind against the seafood industry in the United States to successfully advance past the initial motion to dismiss stage under the Trafficking Victims Protection Reauthorization Act (TVPRA).

Allegations and Court Findings

The plaintiffs filed the suit, titled Akhmad v. Bumble Bee Foods LLC, No. 3:25-cv-00583, in March 2025, citing years of alleged forced labor while catching fish, primarily albacore tuna, sold by the company. The legal complaint was significantly supported by years of research, investigations, and supply chain reports from the Greenpeace global network’s Beyond Seafood fisheries campaigns. The court ruling, overseen by Chief Judge Cynthia Bashant, found that the fishers presented sufficient allegations of forced labor as defined by the TVPRA.

Crucially, the court noted that Bumble Bee did not contest the fishers were subjected to forced labor. Furthermore, the court found that Bumble Bee was aware of or should have known about the widespread issue, concluding that the company “likely had ‘notice about the prevalence’ of forced labor on the vessels from which it sourced tuna, ‘failed to take adequate steps to train staff in order to prevent its occurrence,’” had an “active role in obtaining albacore tuna from the vessels on which Plaintiffs were subject to forced labor,” and resold the tuna for profit. The judge specifically cited numerous reports from Greenpeace East Asia and Greenpeace Southeast Asia as evidence of the company’s knowledge.

Photo: Greenpeace

Voices for Justice and Industry Impact

Plaintiff Syafi’i expressed his profound relief following the decision: “I’m actually in tears. I am happy and overwhelmed. This gives me hope for justice for me and my fellow plaintiffs as we struggle for justice and change for the better. Our fight and sacrifice are not in vain in order to get justice for all of the fishers. I remain steadfast, strong, and enthusiastic.”

Sari Heidenreich, Senior Human Rights Advisor for Greenpeace USA, celebrated the ruling as a victory for workers’ rights: “This is a historic moment and an incredible victory for the fishers and the ocean. By allowing this case to move ahead, the court has given these fishers’ voices the space they deserve... This ruling once again affirms that U.S. companies have a responsibility to ensure the products they sell... were not produced with the abhorrent crimes of forced labor and modern slavery.”

Sari Heidenreich and Arifsyah Nasution

Arifsyah Nasution, Global Project Lead for the Beyond Seafood Campaign at Greenpeace Southeast Asia, emphasized the wider implications for the industry: “With this ruling, all of Big Seafood is officially on notice: exploitation at sea could land you in court at home. It is well known that physical violence, excessive working hours, and lack of payment — all conditions alleged in this lawsuit — are prevalent in the fishing industry and exacerbated by the overexploitation of our oceans.”

[email protected]
www.seafood.media

Print