🔗 Share this article

It was a pioneering law that would curb the worldwide crisis of forest loss.

But, the final version of the EU's anti-deforestation law, previously heralded as the crown jewel of the Green Deal, has been passed in a severely weakened state, leading to alarm from its initial author and green lawmakers.

"The regulation was hollowed out," said the law's original author, citing the exclusion of crucial requirements for downstream traders to verify the origin of commodities like palm oil, soy, wood, beef, rubber, cocoa and coffee.

He warned that a reduced number of responsible companies, less information collected, and imprecise sourcing details would hinder monitoring and legal action.

Political Dismantling

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

This outcome is a far cry from the hopes of more than a million EU citizens who supported an initiative in 2020 calling for a prohibition of goods linked to forest destruction.

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

A Story of Dilution

The law's unravelling has been interpreted as the EU walking back its green talk. It faced two major postponements, reportedly over technical problems, which sparked criticism.

"By revisiting the legislation instead of solving a simple IT problem, authorities invited political interference," commented the Green MEP.

In its first draft, the law mandated that firms to track commodities to their exact plot of land using GPS coordinates, making them liable for deforestation in their supply chains 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 ensured enforcement, created a verifiable paper trail, and prevented firms from obscuring their activities behind complex supply chains."

Intense Lobbying

However, the strict due diligence triggered a backlash in Brussels from large companies, exporting nations, rightwing parties and EU logging states.

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

"The other pressure has come from big trading partners like the United States," noted corporate sustainability professor, suggesting the commission gave in to some demands in trade talks.

The Weakened Final Text

The passed law features several critical weakenings:

• Downstream operators were largely freed from conducting rigorous checks.
• A new “low risk” category was introduced.
• A window for further "simplifications" was opened for next spring.
• Only four countries – geopolitical adversaries of the EU – will face “high risk” scrutiny.

"Rather than strengthening downstream obligations, it stripped them back," said the law's author. "Moving obligations upstream, it lessened the number of responsible firms."

Business Frustration

The delays and changes have also caused frustration for businesses that complied early.

"It is very frustrating because we invested significant resources into preparing," said Xavier Rombouts. "We invested in software, followed seminars and built a team... now they’re saying it could be altered again. It’s a big frustration."

The Commission's Stance

A commission spokesperson defended the outcome, saying: "The commission has responded to concerns and taken action to ensure a simple, fair and cost-efficient implementation."

"The revised regulation ensures stability, which is crucial for companies and national regulators to successfully implement this very important law."