🔗 Share this article

Widely celebrated as a pioneering law that would curb the worldwide scourge of forest loss.

But, the final version of the EU's anti-deforestation law, previously touted as the crown jewel of the European Green Deal, has been passed in a severely weakened state, leading to alarm from its initial author and environmental politicians.

"It has been stripped," said the law's original author, citing the removal of key obligations for downstream traders to check the origin of commodities like palm oil, soy, wood, beef, rubber, cocoa and coffee.

Schally cautioned that fewer obligated actors, fewer data points, and less precise origin data would hinder monitoring and legal action.

Political Dismantling

Environmental MEP a leading green politician went further, describing the postponements, exceptions and new loopholes – including one for paper goods – as the "systematic weakening" of the law.

This final text stands in stark contrast to the hopes of more than a million EU citizens who signed a petition in 2020 calling for a prohibition of goods linked to forest destruction.

When launched in 2021, then-Green Deal commissioner the European commissioner called it "the most ambitious law ever put forward to fight forest loss."

A Story of Dilution

The law's unravelling is seen by critics as the European Union retreating from its green talk. It faced significant delays, reportedly over IT issues, which sparked criticism.

"By revisiting the legislation instead of solving a simple IT problem, authorities invited political interference," remarked the Green MEP.

In its first draft, the regulation required companies to track goods back to their specific geographic origin using GPS coordinates, making them liable for forest loss along their supply lines with penalties and hefty fines.

"This was not red tape for its own sake," Schally said. "These rules were the tool that ensured enforcement, created a verifiable paper trail, and prevented firms from obscuring their activities behind opaque production networks."

Mounting Pressure

Yet, the rigorous checks provoked opposition in Brussels from multinational corporations, producer countries, rightwing parties and member states with forestry industries.

Analysts point to last year's EU elections as a decisive moment, creating a new political majority more skeptical of green regulations.

"The other pressure came from big trading partners outside the EU," noted corporate sustainability professor, implying the EU yielded to some requests during negotiations.

The Weakened Final Text

In the final legislation features key dilutions:

• Downstream operators were mostly exempted from submitting due diligence statements.
• A new “low risk” category was created.
• A window for further "simplifications" was established for next spring.
• Only four countries – geopolitical adversaries of the EU – will face “high risk” scrutiny.

"Instead of tightening downstream obligations, it rolled them back," lamented Schally. "Moving obligations upstream, it lessened the number of responsible firms."

Uncertainty for Companies

The protracted process and revisions have also caused frustration for businesses that complied early.

"It is very frustrating because we invested significant resources into preparing," stated Xavier Rombouts. "We purchased systems, trained staff and established procedures... now they’re saying it could be altered again. It’s a big frustration."

The Commission's Stance

A commission spokesperson supported the final law, stating: "The commission has responded to feedback and taken action to ensure a simple, fair and cost-efficient application."

"The revised regulation ensures stability, which is key for business and national regulators to successfully implement this vitally important law."