EU deforestation law must reflect reality

“Deforestation and human rights violations don’t vanish just because the EU does not recognize them as a threat. Decision-makers must recognize what is happening on the ground where products are sourced,” says Toerris Jaeger, Director of Rainforest Foundation Norway.

The letter emphasizes the need for the benchmarking process to accurately reflect real-world human rights and environmental risks associated with commodities such as timber, cattle, palm oil, soy, and leather.

The EUDR mandates that the European Commission develop a system to classify countries as low, standard, or high-risk based on the likelihood that their commodities contribute to deforestation. This classification will guide member state authorities and inform companies' due diligence processes. Notably, products from low-risk areas will be subject to simplified due diligence, resulting in less scrutiny.

Insufficient methodology

The letter raises concerns about the outline of the methodology the Commission will propose soon, particularly the implication that only countries under UN Security Council and EU Council sanctions would be classified as high-risk. The groups argue that this approach is misguided and fails to consider comprehensive assessments of deforestation risks and human rights violations in production countries. They stress that such a narrow focus could undermine the EUDR's objective of eliminating European complicity in deforestation and related human rights abuses.

“This is extremely concerning, as it would undermine the efficacy of the most promising piece of zero-deforestation legislation in the world, creating a loophole the size of the Amazon,” says Toerris Jaeger, Director of Rainforest Foundation Norway.

None of the South American rainforest countries face UN Security Council or EU Council sanctions. They would hence be below the high-risk threshold.

Potentially politicized process

The letter also highlights apprehensions regarding statements from the Commission suggesting that most countries would be rated as low-risk. The coalition warns that premature conclusions could politicize the benchmarking process and mislead traders and operators, leading to inadequate due diligence and increased non-compliance risks.

The signatories urge the Commission to ensure that the benchmarking process is based on objective criteria, transparently applied, and reflective of actual conditions in production areas. They advocate for a methodology that encompasses a comprehensive assessment of deforestation and forest degradation risks, as well as the enforcement of relevant laws and the protection of human rights, as stipulated in Article 29 of the EUDR.

By adopting a more rigorous and transparent benchmarking approach, the coalition believes the EU can uphold the EUDR's ambitions and effectively contribute to the global effort to protect forests and the rights of Indigenous Peoples and local communities who depend on them.