🔗 Share this article

It was a groundbreaking piece of legislation that would combat the global crisis of forest loss.

However, the final version of the European Union's anti-deforestation law, once heralded as the crown jewel of the European Green Deal, has emerged in a severely weakened state, prompting alarm from its original architect and green lawmakers.

"The regulation was stripped," said Hugo Schally, pointing to the exclusion of crucial requirements 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 imprecise sourcing details would make enforcement and prosecution more difficult.

Political Dismantling

Green party MEP a leading green politician went further, describing the delays, loopholes and exemptions – such as one for paper goods – as the "systematic weakening" of the law.

This final text is a far cry from the demands of more than a million European citizens who signed a petition in 2020 demanding a ban on deforestation-linked products.

At its launch in 2021, the EU's climate chief Frans Timmermans called it "the most ambitious law proposed to fight forest loss."

A Story of Dilution

The regulation's dilution has been interpreted as the European Union retreating from its green talk. The proposal encountered two major postponements, reportedly over technical problems, which sparked criticism.

"By reopening this file rather than fixing a simple IT problem, authorities invited political interference," commented the Green MEP.

Originally, the law required companies to track commodities back to their exact plot of land using geolocation data, holding them accountable for deforestation in their supply chains with criminal charges and large financial penalties.

"It wasn't bureaucracy for its own sake," the former official said. "These rules were the tool that made the rules enforceable, established traceability, and prevented firms from obscuring their activities behind complex supply chains."

Intense Lobbying

However, the rigorous checks triggered a backlash in Brussels from multinational corporations, exporting nations, rightwing parties and member states with forestry industries.

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

"The other pressure came from big trading partners like the United States," noted expert Andreas Rasche, implying the commission gave in to some requests during negotiations.

Key Loopholes Introduced

The passed law includes several critical weakenings:

• Retailers and traders were mostly exempted from conducting rigorous checks.
• A new exemption for small operators was created.
• A window for further "simplifications" was established for next spring.
• Only four countries – Russia, Belarus, North Korea and Myanmar – will face “high risk” scrutiny.

"Instead of tightening rules for companies, it stripped them back," said Schally. "Moving obligations to producers, it lessened the number of responsible firms."

Business Frustration

The delays and changes have also caused frustration for companies that prepared in advance.

"We feel very annoyed because we invested significant resources into preparing," said Xavier Rombouts. "We purchased systems, trained staff and established procedures... now they’re saying it may be changed. It’s a big frustration."

The Commission's Stance

A commission spokesperson supported the final law, stating: "We have listened to concerns and acted to ensure a simple, fair and cost-efficient application."

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