🔗 Share this article

Widely celebrated as a pioneering law that would combat the worldwide crisis of deforestation.

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

"It has been gutted," said Hugo Schally, citing the removal of key obligations for later-stage companies to check the origin of commodities like coffee, cocoa, beef, soy, palm oil, rubber and timber.

He warned that fewer obligated actors, less information collected, and less precise origin data would complicate the task of authorities.

Political Dismantling

Environmental vice-president Marie Toussaint went further, describing the delays, loopholes and exemptions – such as one for paper goods – as the "systematic weakening" of the law.

This outcome is a far cry from the demands of more than a million EU citizens who signed a petition in 2020 calling for a ban on goods linked to forest destruction.

At its launch in 2021, the EU's climate chief the European commissioner trumpeted it as "the toughest legislation ever put forward to fight 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, ostensibly over technical problems, which drew condemnation.

"By reopening this file rather than fixing a technical issue, authorities invited political interference," remarked the Green MEP.

Originally, the regulation required companies to trace commodities to their specific geographic origin using geolocation data, holding them accountable for forest loss along their supply lines with penalties and hefty fines.

"This was not red tape for its own sake," the former official explained. "It was the mechanism that ensured enforcement, established traceability, and stopped companies from hiding behind opaque production networks."

Mounting Pressure

However, the strict due diligence 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.

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

Key Loopholes Introduced

In the final legislation features several critical weakenings:

• Retailers and traders were largely freed from conducting rigorous checks.
• A new exemption for small operators was introduced.
• A window for further "simplifications" was opened 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. "By shifting responsibilities upstream, it reduced accountability."

Business Frustration

The protracted process and revisions have also caused frustration for businesses that complied early.

"We feel very annoyed because we invested significant resources into complying," said a coffee company executive. "We invested in software, followed seminars and built a team... now they’re saying it could be altered again. It’s a big frustration."

Official Defense

An EU representative supported the final law, stating: "We have listened to concerns and taken action to ensure a pragmatic and balanced application."

"The revised regulation provides for predictability, which is key for business and national regulators to successfully implement this very important regulation."