Malaysia to Challenge the European Commission Over EUDR Benchmarking
The Malaysian Palm Oil Council which represents Malaysian palm oil interests has rejected the EU’s benchmarking of Malaysia as a “Standard Risk” for deforestation.
What this means in simple terms is that Malaysian exporters of palm oil, cocoa, timber and other commodities named in the EU’s Deforestation Regulations will have to file extra paperwork to clear their shipments to the EU.
Filing extra paperwork should not be an issue for Malaysian exporters to the EU which already have due diligence systems in place to file reports on time accurately. Malaysian exporters of palm oil have honed their operations to such a fine point that future risks of deforestation in their supply chains are identified and monitored.
So why the violent reaction to the EU’s benchmarking of Malaysia as Standard Risk?
The Parable of The Prodigal Son may explain why the EU’s decision to benchmark Malaysia as “Standard Risk” was received as a shot to the gut. Having done all the work to meet the EU’s demands, Malaysia has the right to be disappointed with the EU Commission’s benchmarking.
According to Belvinder Sron, CEO of MPOC:
“The latest independent satellite data from Satelligence showed that Malaysia’s palm oil sector has transformed its environmental footprint for the better, and confirms its leadership in tackling deforestation, while even the older United Nations data used by the EU highlighted the country’s strong performance.
Furthermore, Global Forest Watch provided transparent, accessible, and consistent data, showing that Malaysia retains far more primary forest than many historically industrialised nations, and we are doing better at preserving it.
Between 2014 and 2023, Malaysia reduced primary forest loss by 65%, outpacing global peers. In 2024 alone, we achieved a further 13% reduction, marking the first time Malaysia has dropped out of the global Top 10 for tropical primary forest loss,”
In stark comparison Lao PDR has joined the top ten list of countries with spiking deforestation rates from 2001 to 2023 and yet was benchmarked as “Low Risk.”
What made it possible for the Ambassador of the European Union to Lao PDR, Mr. Mark Gallagher to celebrate Laos being benchmarked as “Low Risk?”
“This is good news for Laos and for Lao producers exporting coffee, wood or rubber to Europe. Imports from Laos will face the lowest level of compliance checks globally, when entering the EU. This comes as recognition of the efforts made by Laos to combat deforestation.”
The only logical explanation for Lao to be benchmarked as “Low Risk” by the EU comes from Mighty Earth which condemned the EU’s benchmarking of countries for deforestation as a farce.
“The risk benchmarking was supposed to reflect the likelihood that products such as beef, soy, palm oil, coffee, cocoa and timber entering the EU originated in areas that have been recently deforested or were produced illegally. Instead, the risk list published today shows that it was based on political horse trading and favouritism. For countries such as Canada, Ghana, Papua New Guinea and Romania to be classified as “Low risk” is nonsensical, and seemingly wilfully belies recent evidence of deforestation, forest degradation, and illegality linked to commodities originating from those countries being sold on the EU market.
The responsibility for this farcical classification does not primarily lie at the doors of the European Commission. Instead, it rests on EU member state governments, some of which have turned their backs to the climate and Nature emergency facing the planet at the behest of corporate lobbyists from the forestry and agribusiness sectors, especially in countries such as Austria, Germany and Finland. This is their legacy, and it will haunt them.”
Malaysia in its earnest efforts to meet the EU’s green demands clearly did not anticipate that the EU would use its green demands for political horse trading but that is a mistake anyone could have made.
The only loser here is the EU whose green demands have been exposed as less than honest. This exposure will have a profound impact on the Malaysia EU free trade talks as Malaysia has to question how it is to believe what the EU says?
Read also Malaysia’s disappointment with EU roll backs of green demands
What this means in simple terms is that Malaysian exporters of palm oil, cocoa, timber and other commodities named in the EU’s Deforestation Regulations will have to file extra paperwork to clear their shipments to the EU.
Filing extra paperwork should not be an issue for Malaysian exporters to the EU which already have due diligence systems in place to file reports on time accurately. Malaysian exporters of palm oil have honed their operations to such a fine point that future risks of deforestation in their supply chains are identified and monitored.
So why the violent reaction to the EU’s benchmarking of Malaysia as Standard Risk?
The Parable of The Prodigal Son may explain why the EU’s decision to benchmark Malaysia as “Standard Risk” was received as a shot to the gut. Having done all the work to meet the EU’s demands, Malaysia has the right to be disappointed with the EU Commission’s benchmarking.
According to Belvinder Sron, CEO of MPOC:
“The latest independent satellite data from Satelligence showed that Malaysia’s palm oil sector has transformed its environmental footprint for the better, and confirms its leadership in tackling deforestation, while even the older United Nations data used by the EU highlighted the country’s strong performance.
Furthermore, Global Forest Watch provided transparent, accessible, and consistent data, showing that Malaysia retains far more primary forest than many historically industrialised nations, and we are doing better at preserving it.
Between 2014 and 2023, Malaysia reduced primary forest loss by 65%, outpacing global peers. In 2024 alone, we achieved a further 13% reduction, marking the first time Malaysia has dropped out of the global Top 10 for tropical primary forest loss,”
In stark comparison Lao PDR has joined the top ten list of countries with spiking deforestation rates from 2001 to 2023 and yet was benchmarked as “Low Risk.”
What made it possible for the Ambassador of the European Union to Lao PDR, Mr. Mark Gallagher to celebrate Laos being benchmarked as “Low Risk?”
“This is good news for Laos and for Lao producers exporting coffee, wood or rubber to Europe. Imports from Laos will face the lowest level of compliance checks globally, when entering the EU. This comes as recognition of the efforts made by Laos to combat deforestation.”
The only logical explanation for Lao to be benchmarked as “Low Risk” by the EU comes from Mighty Earth which condemned the EU’s benchmarking of countries for deforestation as a farce.
“The risk benchmarking was supposed to reflect the likelihood that products such as beef, soy, palm oil, coffee, cocoa and timber entering the EU originated in areas that have been recently deforested or were produced illegally. Instead, the risk list published today shows that it was based on political horse trading and favouritism. For countries such as Canada, Ghana, Papua New Guinea and Romania to be classified as “Low risk” is nonsensical, and seemingly wilfully belies recent evidence of deforestation, forest degradation, and illegality linked to commodities originating from those countries being sold on the EU market.
The responsibility for this farcical classification does not primarily lie at the doors of the European Commission. Instead, it rests on EU member state governments, some of which have turned their backs to the climate and Nature emergency facing the planet at the behest of corporate lobbyists from the forestry and agribusiness sectors, especially in countries such as Austria, Germany and Finland. This is their legacy, and it will haunt them.”
Malaysia in its earnest efforts to meet the EU’s green demands clearly did not anticipate that the EU would use its green demands for political horse trading but that is a mistake anyone could have made.
The only loser here is the EU whose green demands have been exposed as less than honest. This exposure will have a profound impact on the Malaysia EU free trade talks as Malaysia has to question how it is to believe what the EU says?
Read also Malaysia’s disappointment with EU roll backs of green demands