🔗 Share this article

Originally hailed as a landmark piece of legislation that would curb the global scourge of forest loss.

But, the revised version of the European Union's anti-deforestation law, previously touted as the crown jewel of the Green Deal, has been passed in a severely weakened state, prompting alarm from its initial author and green lawmakers.

"The regulation was stripped," said Hugo Schally, 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.

He warned that a reduced number of responsible companies, fewer data points, and less precise origin data would hinder monitoring and legal action.

A Watered-Down Law

Environmental MEP Marie Toussaint went further, labeling the delays, loopholes and exemptions – including one for printed products – as the "systematic weakening" of the law.

This final text is a far cry from the hopes of over 1.2 million European citizens who signed a petition in 2020 calling for a prohibition of deforestation-linked products.

When launched in 2021, then-Green Deal commissioner the European commissioner trumpeted it as "the toughest law ever put forward to fight deforestation."

A Story of Dilution

The law's unravelling is seen by critics as the European Union retreating from its environmental promises. It faced two major postponements, ostensibly over technical problems, which sparked criticism.

"By revisiting the legislation rather than fixing a technical issue, authorities invited political interference," commented Toussaint.

Originally, the law mandated that firms to track goods back to their specific geographic origin using GPS coordinates, holding them accountable for forest loss along their supply lines with criminal charges and large financial penalties.

"This was not red tape for its own sake," the former official explained. "It was the mechanism that made the rules enforceable, established traceability, and stopped companies from hiding behind complex supply chains."

Intense Lobbying

Yet, the strict due diligence triggered a backlash in the EU capital from multinational corporations, producer countries, rightwing parties and EU logging states.

Experts cite last year's European Parliament elections as a turning point, creating a new political majority more skeptical of green regulations.

"Additional intense pressure came from big trading partners outside the EU," said expert Andreas Rasche, suggesting the commission gave in to some demands in trade talks.

The Weakened Final Text

In the final legislation includes several critical weakenings:

• Downstream operators were largely freed from conducting rigorous checks.
• A new exemption for small operators was created.
• A option for more reductions was established for next spring.
• Only four countries – Russia, Belarus, North Korea and Myanmar – will face the strictest monitoring.

"Instead of tightening rules for companies, it rolled them back," said the law's author. "By shifting responsibilities to producers, it reduced accountability."

Business Frustration

The protracted process and revisions have also created annoyance for businesses that complied early.

"We feel very annoyed because we put a lot of effort into preparing," stated Xavier Rombouts. "We purchased systems, trained staff and established procedures... now they’re saying it may be changed. It’s a major letdown."

The Commission's Stance

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

"The revised regulation ensures stability, which is crucial for companies and competent authorities to effectively enforce this very important regulation."