🔗 Share this article

It was a groundbreaking law that would combat the global crisis of deforestation.

But, the revised version of the EU's anti-deforestation law, once heralded as the crown jewel of the European Green Deal, has been passed in a severely weakened state, prompting alarm from its original architect and green lawmakers.

"The regulation was stripped," said the law's original author, citing the removal of key obligations for later-stage companies to check the provenance of commodities like coffee, cocoa, beef, soy, palm oil, rubber and timber.

Schally cautioned that fewer obligated actors, fewer data points, and less precise origin data would make enforcement and prosecution more difficult.

Political Dismantling

Environmental vice-president Marie Toussaint went further, labeling the delays, loopholes and exemptions – such as one for paper goods – as the "political dismantling" of the law.

This final text stands in stark contrast to the hopes of more than a million EU citizens who supported an initiative in 2020 demanding a prohibition of goods linked to forest destruction.

At its launch in 2021, the EU's climate chief the European commissioner called it "the most ambitious law ever put forward to combat deforestation."

From Ambition to Compromise

The law's unravelling is seen by critics as the EU walking back its green talk. The proposal encountered significant delays, ostensibly over IT issues, which sparked criticism.

"By revisiting the legislation instead of solving a technical issue, authorities invited political interference," commented the Green MEP.

In its first draft, the law mandated that firms to track goods to their exact plot of land using GPS coordinates, making them liable for forest loss along their supply lines with criminal charges and hefty fines.

"It wasn't bureaucracy for its own sake," Schally explained. "It was the mechanism that ensured enforcement, established traceability, and stopped companies from hiding behind complex supply chains."

Mounting Pressure

Yet, the strict due diligence provoked opposition in the EU capital from large companies, exporting nations, conservative political groups and EU logging states.

Experts cite last year's EU elections as a turning point, shifting the balance of power more skeptical of environmental rules.

"Additional intense pressure came from big trading partners like the United States," said corporate sustainability professor, suggesting the commission gave in to some demands in trade talks.

Key Loopholes Introduced

In the final legislation includes key dilutions:

• Retailers and traders were largely freed from submitting due diligence statements.
• A new “low risk” category was created.
• A window for further "simplifications" was opened for next spring.
• Only a handful of nations – geopolitical adversaries of the EU – will face the strictest monitoring.

"Rather than strengthening downstream obligations, it rolled them back," said the law's author. "Moving obligations to producers, it reduced accountability."

Business Frustration

The delays and changes have also caused frustration for companies that prepared in advance.

"We feel very annoyed because we invested significant resources into complying," said Xavier Rombouts. "We invested in software, followed seminars and built a team... now they’re saying it could be altered again. It’s a big frustration."

Official Defense

A commission spokesperson defended the outcome, stating: "We have listened to concerns and acted to ensure a simple, fair and cost-efficient application."

"The new text provides for predictability, which is crucial for companies and competent authorities to successfully implement this very important regulation."