Exhibit 1.01

Conflict Minerals Report of Celestica Inc.

For the reporting period from January 1, 2024 to December 31, 2024

This Conflict Minerals Report (“CMR”) of Celestica Inc. (“Celestica” or the “Company”) has been prepared pursuant to Rule 13p-1 (“Rule 13p-1”) and Form SD promulgated under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, for the reporting period of January 1, 2024 to December 31, 2024.

Introduction

Rule 13p-1 requires disclosure of certain information when a company manufactures or contracts to manufacture products for which the conflict minerals specified in such Rule are necessary to the functionality or production of those products.  “Conflict minerals” are currently defined by the SEC as cassiterite, columbite-tantalite (coltan), gold, wolframite, or their derivatives, which the SEC has currently limited to tantalum, tin and tungsten (the “Conflict Minerals”). The “Covered Countries” for the purposes of Rule 13p-1 are the Democratic Republic of the Congo, the Republic of the Congo, the Central African Republic, South Sudan, Uganda, Rwanda, Burundi, Tanzania, Zambia and Angola.

Celestica is a multinational electronics manufacturing services (“EMS”), hardware platform and supply chain solutions company headquartered in Toronto, Canada. The Company’s global network consists of approximately 40 sites in 16 countries in North America, Europe and Asia. The Company manufactures, or contracts to manufacture, certain products for which Conflict Minerals are necessary to their functionality or production.

Celestica builds products for a wide variety of leading original equipment manufacturers (“OEMs”), cloud-based and other service providers (including hyperscalers), and other companies in a wide range of industries, to be marketed under the customers’ brands. Typically, the customer specifies all parts to be included in the product through an Approved Vendor List (“AVL”). As a result, Celestica does not control the selection of suppliers or materials sourced unless specifically instructed to do so by its customers.

Description of the Company’s Products Covered by this CMR

This CMR relates to products: (i) for which Conflict Minerals are necessary to the functionality or production of that product; (ii) that were manufactured, or contracted to be manufactured, by the Company; and (iii) for which the manufacture was completed during calendar year 2024.

These products, which are referred to in this CMR collectively as the “Covered Products,” consist of printed circuit board assemblies and complete system builds for the following: government certified and highly-specialized manufacturing, electronic and enclosure-related services for aerospace and defense customers; high-precision semiconductor and display equipment and integrated subsystems; a wide range of industrial automation, controls, test and measurement devices; engineering-focused engagements, including full product development in the areas of telematics, human machine interface (HMI), Internet-of-Things (IoT) and embedded systems; advanced solutions for surgical instruments, diagnostic imaging and patient monitoring; efficiency products to help manage and monitor the energy and power industries; and routers, switches, data center interconnects, edge solutions, and servers and storage-related products to manage digital connectivity, commerce and social media applications.

The Company’s Reasonable Country of Origin Inquiry and Due Diligence Process

In accordance with Rule 13p-1, the Company has conducted in good faith a reasonable country of origin inquiry (“RCOI”) regarding the Conflict Minerals necessary to the functionality or production of the products it manufactures or contracts to manufacture.  This RCOI was reasonably designed to determine whether any of such Conflict Minerals originated in the Covered Countries and whether any of such Conflict Minerals may be from recycled or scrap sources.

Celestica engaged with its immediate (Tier 1) suppliers to collect information about the presence and sourcing of Conflict Minerals used in products and components supplied to the Company. For new Tier 1 suppliers that came on board in 2024, such engagement also included the provision of Celestica’s Responsible Minerals Sourcing Policy (described below) to such suppliers, and education on Celestica’s position regarding Conflict Minerals sourcing practices and the requirements of Rule 13p-1.  Information was collected using the Conflict Minerals Reporting Template (“CMRT”), a standardized reporting template developed by the Responsible Minerals Initiative (“RMI”).

Supplier responses were evaluated for plausibility, consistency, and gaps both in terms of which products were stated to contain or not contain necessary Conflict Minerals, as well as their origin. Additional supplier contacts were conducted to address various issues, including implausible statements regarding no presence of Conflict Minerals, incomplete data on the CMRT, responses that did not identify smelters or refiners (“SORS”), responses which indicated a sourcing location without complete supporting information from the supply chain, and organizations that were identified as SORs, but not verified as such through analysis and/or research by such supplier.

In addition to the RCOI, the Company also exercised due diligence on the source and chain of custody of its necessary Conflict Minerals where the Company, based on its RCOI, had reason to believe that such Conflict Minerals may have originated in the Covered Countries and may not be from recycled or scrap sources.

The following criteria were used to determine which supply chains and associated SORs were moved to the due diligence step:

A total of 2,425 suppliers were surveyed as part of the RCOI process. Of these suppliers, 2,358 provided responses, and of those, 54.37% responded “yes” as to having one or more of the Conflict Minerals as necessary to the functionality or production of the products they supply to Celestica. An aggregate of 933 individual SORs (treating each smelter identification number as pertaining to a separate SOR) were identified as used by such suppliers; however, the SOR information obtained from suppliers pertained to all customers of such suppliers, and did not correspond specifically to products/components supplied to the Company.

The Company’s due diligence measures were designed to conform to the framework in the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development’s (OECD) Due Diligence Guidance for Responsible Supply Chains of Minerals from Conflict-Affected and High-Risk Areas: Third Edition (2016) and accompanying Supplements.

The Company’s supply chain with respect to the Covered Products is complex, and there are many third parties in the supply chain between the ultimate manufacturer of the Covered Products and the original sources of Conflict Minerals.  The Company does not purchase Conflict Minerals directly from mines or SORs.  The Company must therefore rely on its suppliers to provide information regarding the origin of Conflict Minerals that are included in the Covered Products.  However, because the Company believes that the smelters and refiners of the Conflict Minerals are best situated to identify the sources of Conflict Minerals, the Company has also taken steps to identify the applicable smelters and refiners of Conflict Minerals in the Company’s supply chain.

The OECD Guidance identifies five due diligence steps:

Step 1: Establish Strong Company Management Systems

Step 2: Identify and Assess Risks in the Supply Chain

Step 3: Design and Implement a Strategy to Respond to Identified Risks

Step 4: Carry out Independent Third-Party Audit of Smelter/Refiner’s Due Diligence Practices

Step 5: Report Annually on Supply Chain Due Diligence

It is important to note that the OECD Guidance was written for both upstream and downstream companies in the supply chain. As Celestica is a downstream company in the supply chain, its due diligence practices were tailored accordingly.

In addition to the RCOI described in detail above, the following constitute the procedures the Company used to identify supply chain risks in relation to Conflict Minerals in the Covered Products, and the due diligence activities undertaken to respond to those risks.

OECD Guidance Step 1: Establish strong company management systems

A management system is a framework of policies, procedures, processes and organizational structures that help enable a company to complete all tasks necessary to achieve its objectives. Celestica has established such a system by taking the following steps.

Adopt a conflict minerals policy

Celestica maintains a policy covering Conflict Minerals (its “Responsible Minerals Sourcing Policy”¹), which is publicly available at www.celestica.com (under “About Us — Compliance and Ethics — Responsible Minerals Sourcing Policy and Report — Responsible Minerals Sourcing Policy”), and states:

The mining and trading of Coltan (the metal ore from which Tantalum is extracted), Wolframite (the metal ore from which Tungsten is extracted), Cassiterite (the metal ore from which Tin is extracted), and Gold, and their respective derivatives (collectively, “Conflict Minerals”), originating from the Democratic Republic of Congo (“DRC”) or adjoining countries (the “DRC Region”) has financed conflict, resulting in widespread human rights violations and environmental degradation. Section 1502(b) of the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act (“Conflict Minerals Law”) requires SEC reporting companies to undertake an inquiry as to the source and chain of custody of conflict minerals and to make certain disclosures in connection therewith.

Similar concerns have been raised with respect to the social and environmental impact of the mining and trading of Cobalt (a magnetic metallic element used in, among other things, alloys, batteries, and electric vehicles), in the DRC (currently the largest producer of Cobalt), including child labour and unsafe working conditions in artisanal Cobalt mining, and other human rights abuses. As a responsible sourcing organization, Celestica supports efforts to prevent human rights abuses associated with Cobalt mining, and intends to utilize associated Responsible Minerals Initiative (“RMI”) programs and tools to help identify the source of Cobalt in its supply chain.

Celestica fully supports the objectives of the Conflict Minerals Law, as well as industry initiatives related to the mining of Cobalt, which aim to minimize violence and human rights violations in the DRC Region. We will comply with all applicable obligations under Conflict Minerals Law. Celestica expects that all suppliers comply with Conflict Minerals Law and provide all necessary declarations for Conflict Minerals using the RMI Conflict Minerals Reporting Template and for Cobalt using the RMI Extended Minerals Reporting Template. These measures will be used in conjunction with industry initiatives such as the Responsible Minerals Assurance Process (“RMAP”), to reasonably assure that the Tantalum, Tungsten, Tin, Gold and Cobalt in the products we manufacture do not directly or indirectly finance or benefit armed groups in the DRC Region. Celestica will assess future business with suppliers who are noncompliant with this policy.

Celestica is committed to ethical practices and compliance with applicable laws and regulations wherever it does business.

¹ In addition to Conflict Minerals, Celestica aims to broaden its minerals assessment efforts to include the identification and mitigation of supply chain risks related to human rights abuses and environmental issues associated with Cobalt mining and processing. In connection therewith, Celestica’s Conflict Minerals Policy, which was first adopted in 2013 to cover Conflict Minerals, was expanded in 2024 to include Cobalt and renamed the “Responsible Minerals Sourcing Policy.” However, this CMR is limited to Celestica’s RCOI and due diligence efforts with respect to Conflict Minerals (as defined herein).

Assemble an internal team to support supply chain due diligence

Celestica has established a management system for Conflict Minerals. This management system includes an internal Conflict Minerals steering committee made up of senior management from Corporate Compliance, Finance, Supply Chain Management and Commodity Management functions, and a Supply Chain Management Environmental Engineering team to manage Conflict Minerals activities. The steering committee is updated on the results of Celestica’s due diligence efforts on a regular basis.

Establish a system of controls and transparency over the mineral supply chain

To provide better transparency within Celestica’s mineral supply chains and to facilitate communication of policies and expectations, Celestica has established an internal system to identify suppliers in Celestica’s mineral supply chains and the relationships between them, collect, store, and review information on Conflict Minerals sourcing practices, track information on SORs, and flag risks based on SOR sourcing practices.

Strengthen company engagement with suppliers

Celestica engaged with suppliers through multiple communication outreaches by email and phone to educate suppliers on Celestica’s expectations for sourcing and its Responsible Minerals Sourcing Policy, and the requirements of Rule 13p-1.  Suppliers were provided various avenues to obtain additional information and guidance regarding Celestica’s Conflict Minerals compliance program, including on-line access to such policy, and contact email addresses and telephone numbers for obtaining answers to questions and/or guidance on completing Celestica’s information requests.

OECD Guidance Step 2: Identify and Assess Risks in the Supply Chain

The following steps are recommended by the OECD to identify and assess risks in mineral supply chains.

Identify the SORs in the supply chain

The Company attempted to obtain information on identified SORs using Celestica’s Conflict Minerals database, which includes information provided through internet searches, other research activities (e.g., reviewing government databases and industry and trade organization lists), and contact with suppliers providing SOR information on their reporting templates. The Company also followed up where a sourcing location provided (country of mine origin) is not believed to be a known reserve for the given metal.

Identified SORs were matched against available lists of processors that have been certified by internationally-recognized industry validation schemes, such as the RMI’s Responsible Minerals Assurance Process (“RMAP”), the London Bullion Market Association’s Responsible Sourcing Programme and the Responsible Jewellery Council’s Chain-of-Custody Certification Program. Suppliers and products associated with certified SORs were assumed to meet the OECD Guidance due diligence standards and responsibly source their materials.

OECD Guidance Step 3: Design and Implement a Strategy to Respond to Identified Risks

Celestica implemented the following measures to address high risk SORs.

Report findings to senior management

A regular update is provided to Celestica’s Conflict Minerals steering committee on the progress and findings of the RCOI and due diligence.

Devise and adopt a risk management plan, monitor and track risk mitigation, and evaluate supplier relationship

Celestica builds products for leading OEMs and other companies according to specifications provided by the customer to Celestica. Typically, the customer specifies all parts included in the product through an AVL. As a result, Celestica does not control selection of suppliers or materials sources unless specifically instructed to do so by its customers. If a risk is identified, Celestica will inform the customer of the risk in the supply chain and work with such customer to manage and mitigate the risk.

For parts that Celestica designs or over which Celestica has engineering control, if a risk is identified, Celestica will express its concerns to the relevant suppliers about providing revenue to armed groups within the Covered Countries. Celestica will work with suppliers to provide a roadmap intended to ensure that the Conflict Minerals they supply to Celestica will be responsibly sourced. If a supplier refuses to comply, Celestica will assess future business with the supplier.

The identification of SORS who may be located in countries subject to U.S. sanctions, or who are sanctioned parties, is included in the process described above. If Celestica identifies potential economic sanctions risk as part of its due diligence review process, it works with the relevant suppliers to evaluate and remediate such risks in a manner consistent with applicable sanctions-program requirements.

OECD Guidance Step 4: Carry out Independent Third-Party Audit of Smelter/Refiner’s Due Diligence Practices

This OECD step does not require or define audits for downstream companies.  However, downstream companies can support these audits by supporting or joining industry organizations.

Celestica does not typically have a direct relationship with Conflict Minerals SORs and does not perform direct audits of these entities within its supply chain. However, as a member of the Responsible Business Alliance (“RBA”), Celestica participates in ongoing discussions and updates of the RMI RMAP, an audit program designed to validate SORs’ sourcing practices.  Through the RMAP validation process, which is voluntary, an independent third party audits the procurement and processing activities of a SOR to determine if it has the systems and processes in place to support responsible sourcing of raw materials and can provide evidence to support their sourcing activities.

OECD Guidance Step 5: Report Annually on Supply Chain Due Diligence.

In fulfilling this step, Celestica’s Conflict Minerals steering committee:

Due Diligence Results

Based on the information obtained in the Company’s due diligence process, the Company does not have sufficient information to determine the particular facilities used to process Conflict Minerals in the Covered Products. SOR information was obtained from most (but not all) suppliers, and the SOR information that was obtained from suppliers was at a company or division level, not at a product level, and as a result, we cannot determine which of the identified SORs are actually in Celestica’s supply chain. Therefore, to the extent that any sanctioned entities or countries appear below, this does not indicate actual inclusion in Celestica’s supply chain. With respect to the 933 SORs identified as used by the Company’s suppliers, 259 were certified as Conformant by RMAP or another recognized certification program (London Bullion Market Association’s Responsible Sourcing Programme or Responsible Jewellery Council Chain-of-Custody Certification). In addition, 8 SORs were identified as “active,” i.e., they have committed to undergo a RMAP audit. The 933 SORs that were identified pursuant to the due diligence process, and their certification status, where applicable, are set forth below.

**Naming of the Facility is as reflected in the RMI database as of March 25, 2025.

SORs denoted with an (*) have been sanctioned by the U.S. Department of the Treasury’s Office of Foreign Assets Control (“OFAC”), and were reported as utilized by certain of our Tier 1 suppliers in their supply chains (Celestica has no direct business with these SORs). Celestica subjected each of these suppliers to our escalation process, and as a result, several of such suppliers removed one or more of such applicable SORs from their supply chain. The escalation process remains in progress.

Based on the information obtained in the Company’s due diligence process, the Company does not have sufficient information to determine the country of origin of the Conflict Minerals in the Covered Products.  However, the following represent the countries of origin identified by the SORs set forth above.  The Company’s efforts to determine the mine(s) or location of origin with the greatest possible specificity are described in the RCOI and due diligence discussion above.

Given that not all of the SORs identified by the Company’s suppliers are certified by an independent third-party, that the SOR information obtained from suppliers did not correspond specifically to products/components supplied to the Company (and may therefore include SORs and/or countries of origin that are not applicable to the Conflict Minerals used in our products), that a few surveyed suppliers either did not respond to our requests for information or did not provide SOR information, and because necessary Conflict Minerals in a particular Covered Product may be sourced from multiple SORs, although the Company reasonably believes that certain of its necessary Conflict Minerals in the Covered Products may be from Covered Countries (as described above), it could not determine the country of origin for necessary Conflict Minerals in its Covered Products. In addition, based on the foregoing, the Company was unable to determine whether the necessary Conflict Minerals in the Covered Products that may be from the Covered Countries were from recycled or scrap sources, or came from sources that directly or indirectly financed or benefitted armed groups in the Covered Countries, as such term is defined in Rule 13p-1. However, of all responding suppliers in the Company’s due diligence process, none indicated (at any point during the RCOI or due diligence process) that it had sourced Conflict Minerals to the Company that directly or indirectly benefited or financed armed groups (as that term is defined in Rule 13p-1) in the Covered Countries.

Celestica intends to undertake the following steps during the next compliance period to improve the due diligence conducted to further determine whether necessary Conflict Minerals in its Covered Products are sourced from the Covered Countries, or are from recycled or scrap sources, and to mitigate the risk that its necessary Conflict Minerals sourced from Covered Countries finance or benefit armed groups, including:

Cautionary Note Concerning Forward-Looking Statements

Certain statements in this report are “forward-looking” within the meaning of the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995. Words such as “intends,” “expects,” “plans,” “believes,” “estimates,” “anticipates,” and similar expressions are used to identify these forward-looking statements. Examples of forward-looking statements include statements relating to our future plans, and any other statement that does not directly relate to any historical or current fact. Forward-looking statements are based on our current expectations and assumptions, which may not prove to be accurate. These statements are not guarantees and are subject to risks, uncertainties and changes in circumstances that are difficult to predict, including, but not limited to, regulatory changes and judicial developments related to the Conflict Minerals rule; changes in or developments related to our products or supply chain; and/or industry developments relating to supply chain diligence, disclosure and other practices. Actual outcomes and results may differ materially from these forward-looking statements. As a result, these statements speak only as of the date they are made and we undertake no obligation to update or revise any forward-looking statement, except as required by law.