🔗 Share this article

It was a landmark piece of legislation that would help stop the global crisis of deforestation.

But, the revised version of the EU's anti-deforestation law, once heralded as the flagship policy of the European Green Deal, has emerged in a severely weakened state, prompting alarm from its initial author and environmental politicians.

"It has been gutted," stated Hugo Schally, pointing to the exclusion 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, less information collected, and less precise origin data would hinder monitoring and legal action.

Political Dismantling

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

This outcome stands in stark contrast to the demands of more than a million European citizens who signed a petition in 2020 calling for a ban on deforestation-linked products.

At its launch in 2021, then-Green Deal commissioner Frans Timmermans trumpeted it as "the toughest law ever put forward to combat forest loss."

A Story of Dilution

The law's unravelling is seen by critics as the European Union retreating from its environmental promises. The proposal encountered two major postponements, reportedly over technical problems, which drew condemnation.

"By reopening this file instead of solving a technical issue, authorities invited political interference," remarked the Green MEP.

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

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

Mounting Pressure

However, the rigorous checks triggered a backlash in the EU capital from multinational corporations, producer countries, conservative political groups and EU logging states.

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

"Additional intense pressure came from big trading partners outside the EU," noted expert Andreas Rasche, implying the commission gave in to some requests during negotiations.

Key Loopholes Introduced

In the final legislation includes several critical weakenings:

• Downstream operators were largely freed from submitting due diligence statements.
• A new “low risk” category was introduced.
• A option for more reductions was established for next spring.
• Only a handful of nations – Russia, Belarus, North Korea and Myanmar – will face “high risk” scrutiny.

"Instead of tightening downstream obligations, it rolled them back," lamented the law's author. "Moving obligations upstream, it reduced accountability."

Business Frustration

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

"It is very frustrating because we put a lot of effort into complying," said 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 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 revised regulation ensures stability, which is crucial for companies and national regulators to effectively enforce this vitally important regulation."