🔗 Share this article

Originally hailed as a pioneering piece of legislation that would combat the global crisis of deforestation.

However, the revised version of the European Union's anti-deforestation law, previously heralded as the flagship policy of the Green Deal, has been passed in a severely weakened state, prompting alarm from its initial author and environmental politicians.

"The regulation was gutted," stated Hugo Schally, citing the removal of crucial requirements for downstream traders to check the origin of products like palm oil, soy, wood, beef, rubber, cocoa and coffee.

Schally cautioned that a reduced number of responsible companies, fewer data points, and less precise origin data would complicate the task of authorities.

A Watered-Down Law

Green party MEP Marie Toussaint went further, describing the postponements, exceptions and new loopholes – including one for paper goods – as the "political dismantling" of the law.

This final text stands in stark contrast to the hopes of over 1.2 million European citizens who supported an initiative in 2020 demanding a prohibition of deforestation-linked products.

When launched in 2021, then-Green Deal commissioner Frans Timmermans called it "the most ambitious law proposed to fight forest loss."

A Story of Dilution

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

"By revisiting the legislation instead of solving a simple IT problem, the commission opened Pandora’s box," remarked Toussaint.

In its first draft, the regulation required companies to track goods back to their exact plot of land using geolocation data, making them liable for forest loss along their supply lines with criminal charges and large financial penalties.

"This was not red tape for its own sake," Schally explained. "These rules were the tool that ensured enforcement, created a verifiable paper trail, and stopped companies from hiding behind complex supply chains."

Mounting Pressure

Yet, the strict due diligence provoked opposition in Brussels from multinational corporations, exporting nations, conservative political groups and EU logging states.

Experts cite last year's EU elections as a turning point, creating a new political majority less favorable toward environmental rules.

"Additional intense pressure came from big trading partners outside the EU," noted expert Andreas Rasche, suggesting the EU yielded to some requests during negotiations.

Key Loopholes Introduced

The passed law includes several critical weakenings:

• Retailers and traders were largely freed from submitting due diligence statements.
• A new exemption for small operators was created.
• A option for more reductions was established 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. "By shifting responsibilities to producers, it lessened the number of responsible firms."

Business Frustration

The protracted process and revisions have also caused frustration for companies that prepared in advance.

"It is very frustrating because we put a lot of effort into preparing," stated a coffee company executive. "We invested in software, followed seminars and built a team... now they’re saying it may be changed. It’s a big frustration."

Official Defense

A commission spokesperson defended the outcome, stating: "The commission has responded to concerns and taken action to ensure a simple, fair and cost-efficient implementation."

"The new text ensures stability, which is crucial for companies and national regulators to effectively enforce this very important regulation."