🔗 Share this article

It was a landmark law that would curb the worldwide scourge of deforestation.

However, the revised version of the European Union's anti-deforestation law, once touted as the flagship policy of the Green Deal, has been passed in a severely weakened state, leading to criticism from its original architect and green lawmakers.

"It has been stripped," stated the law's original author, citing the exclusion of crucial requirements for downstream traders to verify the provenance of commodities like palm oil, soy, wood, beef, rubber, cocoa and coffee.

He warned that fewer obligated actors, fewer data points, and imprecise sourcing details would hinder monitoring and legal action.

Political Dismantling

Green party MEP Marie Toussaint was more blunt, labeling the postponements, exceptions and new loopholes – including one for printed products – as the "political dismantling" of the law.

This final text is a far cry from the hopes of over 1.2 million European citizens who supported an initiative in 2020 calling for a prohibition of goods linked to forest destruction.

When launched in 2021, the EU's climate chief the European commissioner trumpeted it as "the toughest law proposed to fight deforestation."

A Story of Dilution

The law's unravelling has been interpreted as the EU walking back its environmental promises. It faced two major postponements, ostensibly over IT issues, which drew condemnation.

"By reopening this file rather than fixing a technical issue, authorities invited political interference," commented Toussaint.

In its first draft, the law mandated that firms to trace commodities to their specific geographic origin using GPS coordinates, holding them accountable for forest loss along their supply lines with penalties and large financial penalties.

"This was not red tape for its own sake," the former official said. "These rules were the tool that made the rules enforceable, created a verifiable paper trail, and prevented firms from obscuring their activities behind complex supply chains."

Mounting Pressure

However, the rigorous checks provoked opposition in the EU capital from large companies, producer countries, conservative political groups and EU logging states.

Analysts point to last year's European Parliament elections as a decisive moment, shifting the balance of power more skeptical of green regulations.

"The other pressure has come from big trading partners outside the EU," noted expert Andreas Rasche, implying the commission gave in to some demands in trade talks.

Key Loopholes Introduced

The passed law includes several critical weakenings:

• Downstream operators were largely freed from submitting due diligence statements.
• A new exemption for small operators was introduced.
• A window for further "simplifications" was established for next spring.
• Only four countries – geopolitical adversaries of the EU – will face the strictest monitoring.

"Instead of tightening downstream obligations, it rolled them back," said the law's author. "By shifting responsibilities upstream, it lessened the number of responsible firms."

Uncertainty for Companies

The protracted process and revisions have also created annoyance for companies that prepared in advance.

"We feel very annoyed because we invested significant resources into complying," said Xavier Rombouts. "We purchased systems, trained staff and established procedures... now they’re saying it could be altered again. 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 implementation."

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