You're browsing our English site, so by default we are only showing content in English. If you'd prefer to view all available content regardless of language, please change this switch.
You're browsing our English site, so by default we are only showing content in English. If you'd prefer to view all available content regardless of language, please change this switch.
There are currently legislative initiatives underway in the EU, the UK and the US seeking to reduce the impact of consumption and business activities in these jurisdictions on global deforestation. All three legislative initiatives have included some kind of “nod” to the need to protect the tenure and other human rights of indigenous peoples and of local communities. However, none clearly requires the application of international human rights law standards. Instead, the laws rely explicitly on national laws, or, at best (in the case of the EU regulatory proposal), the position is left legally ambiguous.
Relying on national laws to protect the rights of indigenous peoples and of local communities whose lands, territories, resources, livelihoods and other rights are affected by agro-industrial expansion is not enough. This briefing highlights some reasons for this:
Many countries which produce forest risk commodities have no or limited protections for customary land rights under national law, meaning indigenous peoples and local communities are vulnerable to dispossession, often without any consultation or compensation.
Even in countries which have laws protecting indigenous peoples’ and/or local communities’ tenure rights, these laws are often substandard compared with international human rights law. Where the right to obtain a formal land title exists, titling processes are often extremely slow and often delimit and register only part – often only a very small part – of customary lands. There is frequently no interim protection for lands in respect of which a claim has been made by indigenous peoples or local communities, but which are not yet formally titled.
Rules under national law can be internally inconsistent or unclear, for example when court rulings have not been implemented in legislation, or when different sectors have incompatible requirements.
This briefing sets out 4 short case studies from Peru, Cameroon, Guyana and Indonesia, which demonstrate what “protection” by national law means in practice for indigenous peoples and local communities, and why it is critical that the legislative proposals are enhanced to support full protection of the rights of both indigenous peoples and of local communities that are affected by agricultural commodity production.
Part of the following timelines
UK: Environment Bill becomes law, following CSO & business pressure on Govt. to introduce due diligence requirements to tackle deforestation
Gabriela Quijano from Forest Peoples Programme calls on the UK government to include specific requirements on businesses to ensure respect for the rights of both indigenous peoples and local communities
A group of companies has written a second letter urging the UK government to go further and strengthen its proposed legislation to combat deforestation
A coalition of NGOs, Indigenous Peoples’ groups, scientists, and academics address an open letter to the UK's Prime Minister calling on the Environment Bill proposal to be strengthened, and to include more stringent due diligence requirements for forest commodities
A report by WWF shows that the current anti-deforestation laws proposed in the Environment Bill are not doing enough to protect forests, ecosystems and communities
Major food brands and trade associations in the UK are questioning the need for new regulations forcing them to examine their supply chains and ensure that they are free of links to deforestation overseas
A third delay in January 2021 on the Environment Bill angers campaigners and activists, who worry that leaving the EU and delaying this bill will weaken environmental regulations
On 11 November 2020, following a consultation, the UK Government confirmed that a new law, which includes due diligence on forest risk commodities, will be introduced through the Environment Bill 2019-2021
A proposed new law to ensure products are not linked to forest destruction needs to cover more companies and be stricter on what it prohibits, argue Alexandra Benjamin & Obed Owusu-Addai from Fern.
Supermarkets, food manufacturers and restaurant chains under pressure from campaigners over their environmental impact urged Britain on Monday to strengthen a plan to stop tropical forests from being cut down to grow cocoa, palm oil and soy.
Tom Wills from Tradecraft Exchange discusses the strengths and weaknesses of the UK's proposed Environment Bill and argues that it should go beyond deforestation to also include human rights due diligence
The CORE Coalition welcomes the government’s announcement that it will require UK
companies to carry out due diligence on their supply chains - but the government must
impose due diligence with legal liability for companies across all human rights and
environmental harms.
The EU Parliament has sent the EUDR back to the committee for interinstitutional trilogue negotiations to grant companies an additional year for implementation.
Nestlé, Ferrero, Unilever and Mars have joined calls by other food and drink manufacturers in opposing the European Union’s delay to deforestation laws.
The Cocoa Coalition, comprising companies and civil society organizations, supports the EU Deforestation Regulation (EUDR) and urges swift adoption of the delayed implementation without reopening negotiations, while also calling for support to smallholder farmers for compliance.
Friends of the Earth Europe and 225 organizations urge the EU to reject a proposal delaying the EU Deforestation Regulation, emphasising its importance in combating deforestation and supporting human rights.
The EU's anti-deforestation regulation faces criticism for potentially allowing major deforestation contributors to avoid being classified as "high risk," which could weaken the regulation's effectiveness.
The article argues that the EU's anti-deforestation law should prioritize input from frontline communities, as governments in Malaysia and Indonesia are undermining Indigenous rights and providing unreliable forest data.
New analysis by Earthsight reveals European consumers have been buying beef and leather from firms linked to illegalities in the Brazilian Amazon uncovered by the Environmental Investigation Agency. According to Earthsight this serves as a reminder that without the EU Deforestation Regulation, European consumption will continue to drive deforestation and rights abuses overseas.
The companies consider it important that the European Union adopts a robust law that minimises the risk of conversion and degradation of natural ecosystems (alongside deforestation and the degradation of natural forests) as well as human rights violations, associated with commodities and products placed on the EU market.
A delegation of indigenous, human rights, and environmental organisations published a statement urging the European Commission to include independent civil society groups in ongoing key talks with Malaysia and Indonesia over its anti-deforestation rules.
Companies – and the EU Competent Authorities that have the responsibility of implementing the law - now have 18 months to prepare before the law comes into action, at the end of 2024.
EU legislators reached political agreement in the early hours of Tuesday, 6 December, to pass a new law to ensure products on the EU market are not linked to the destruction or degradation of forests. WWF and Greenpeace welcome the law as breakthrough but also point to some of its weaknesses.
While the law is a historic first, it fails to include strong provisions to protect the land rights of Indigenous Peoples and local communities, who time and time again have proven to be the best guardians of the forests, says NGO Fern.
Negotiations between the Commission, Parliament and Council are set to finalise next week. One crucial provision of the draft law currently being targeted by certain EU member states, is the protection of the rights of indigenous peoples and local communities.
A delegation of MEPs will now take the Parliament's position to negotiations with the EU Member States, who agreed a range of changes in the EU Council in June to weaken key elements of the proposed law.
Measures would oblige banks to conduct due diligence to prevent the financing of deforestation, boost protections for indigenous communities, and add rubber and leather to the list of imported products that would be screened for deforestation links.
The Council adopted its negotiating position (general approach) on a proposal to limit the consumption of products contributing to deforestation or forest degradation.
Almost all plantations linked to deforestation are currently owned by just three multinational companies, which together have made deals worth billions of euros with European banks.
Indonesian civil society groups call for the EU proposal to be strengthened by including SMEs, a complaint mechanism, and by considering the impact on small holders, indigenous groups and communities
Lessons from the implementation of the EU Timber Regulation show that Member States’ Competent Authorities often fail to meaningfully implement and enforce the law in practice, argues Earthsight
Some EU member states want more time to implement the upcoming anti-deforestation law, which includes due-diligence obligations, citing concerns about the administrative burden that SMEs might face.
The undersigned organisations, welcome the European Commission’s proposal for a new EU regulation on deforestation-free products. It is now up to the European Parliament and Member States to preserve and improve the essential elements of the Commission’s proposal and deliver a strong and ambitious law.
Civil society organisations and representatives of Indigenous communities all over the world call on the EU to require businesses to respect land rights in anti-deforestation rules
Cameroonian activists rallied in front of the EU delegation in Yaoundé to demand the block to cease support for rubber linked to deforestation, and to call for an ambitious EU legislation on forest commodities
The fate of the proposals on (i) minimising the risk of deforestation and forest degradation associated with products placed on the EU market and (ii) sustainable corporate governance is now unclear, raising concerns among civil society.
The organisations call on the EU to ensure that its upcoming legislative measures are effective and fully uphold their rights as set out in international law, and in line with the EU’s own commitments.