DJI has commenced legal action against the US Department of Defense challenging its controversial designation as a “Chinese military company.” This move comes after the Pentagon included the drone manufacturer in its list of entities with alleged ties to the Chinese military, sparking a series of detrimental consequences for DJI. As the largest privately owned seller of consumer and commercial drones, DJI highlighted the adverse impacts of this label on its reputation and financial stability.
Here are the key points of DJI’s battle against the Department of Defense:
- DJI stressed that it is not owned or controlled by the Chinese military and serves a wide range of users, including first responders, law enforcement agencies, businesses, and hobbyists.
- Despite reaching out to the Department of Defense for over 16 months and submitting a detailed petition for delisting, DJI claimed that the agency displayed a lack of transparency in its decision-making process.
- DJI alleged that the DoD’s reasoning behind the designation was flawed, pointing out inaccuracies and outdated information used to justify the company’s inclusion in the list.
- The drone-maker accused the Department of Defense of violating its due process rights and the law by keeping DJI on the list of “Chinese military companies” without proper explanation or justification.
Notably, this legal battle is not the first time DJI has faced scrutiny from US government agencies. In 2020, the Department of Commerce placed the company on its entity list, restricting American companies from supplying it with components without specific authorization. Subsequently, DJI was also added to the Treasury department’s list of alleged “Chinese military-industrial complex companies” due to its supposed involvement in surveillance activities targeting Uyghur Muslims in China.
More recently, DJI’s latest consumer drones encountered issues at US customs, citing the Uyghur Forced Labor Prevention Act as the reason for their detention. Despite DJI’s denial of operating manufacturing facilities in the Xinjiang region associated with forced Uyghur labor, the company continues to face challenges in the US market.
In closing, DJI’s legal battle against the Department of Defense underscores the complexities of navigating national security concerns and international business operations, shedding light on the intricacies of global trade relations and regulatory challenges. It calls for a transparent and fair evaluation process to ensure the protection of companies’ rights and interests in an increasingly interconnected world.
