We’ve been sounding the alarm lately about Malaysia’s resistance to the European Union Deforestation Regulation (EUDR), a law that aims to prevent products associated with deforestation from entering the EU. Malaysia has lobbied against forest protection rules, excluded civil society from policy discussions, and played the victim card in high-level discussions with the EU – all while timber and palm oil production continue to be the nation’s leading causes of deforestation. Our local partners in Sarawak, on the other hand, are fighting to have their voices heard on how the EUDR could make a positive impact on their communities – as long as proper checks and balances are in place.
But what is the EUDR, why is Malaysia so scared, and why do we care so much about calling Sarawak a “high-risk” region?
What is the EUDR?
The EU Deforestation Regulation, sometimes called the EU Regulation on Deforestation-Free Products, is a law passed by the European Union to combat global deforestation and forest degradation. It restricts the import of products like timber, palm oil, coffee, soy, beef, and rubber if they are linked to deforestation or violations of human rights.
The law is set to take effect in January 2025 and requires companies importing these goods into the EU to prove that they were not sourced from land that was deforested after December 31, 2020. Countries or regions will be categorized as low, standard, or high risk, with high-risk areas subject to stricter oversight and monitoring. Malaysia, as one of the world’s main producers of palm oil and tropical timber, and home to some of the oldest rainforests in the world, is being highly scrutinized for its dubious forest conversion practices.
What does Malaysia have to say about EUDR?
Malaysia has been very vocal in its criticism of EUDR. The government argues that the law could disrupt the country’s palm oil and timber industries, and claims that smallholders will be disproportionately impacted. They disagree with the EUDR’s definition of forests, since it would prevent them from claiming that oil palm and timber plantations are “forests” – even though timber and oil palm plantations are actually the two main drivers of deforestation in Malaysia.
Malaysia also insists that its certification programs, such as the Malaysian Sustainable Palm Oil (MSPO) standard and the Malaysian Timber Certification Scheme (MTCS), should be sufficient to meet EUDR requirements, but we have reported extensively on the failures of the MTCS to ensure sustainability and human rights standards.
Why are we so concerned about Sarawak, specifically?
The State of Sarawak accounts for more than two-thirds of all planned deforestation in Malaysia. Located in East Malaysia on the island of Borneo, Sarawak is home to some of the world’s most diverse and climate-critical rainforests – which are further home to tens of thousands of Indigenous people who rely on the forest for their livelihoods. The state government has set a goal to establish one million hectares of timber plantations by 2025 (an area twice the size of Brunei) – but to do this, more than 400,000 hectares of naturally regenerating forest would need to be converted.
Access to information in Sarawak is extremely limited. A lot of what we know about its forest cover comes from hours spent digging, leaked documents, and labor-intensive satellite analysis. Many Indigenous communities don’t even have access to basic information about their native customary lands – even in the very few cases where villages have been granted legal title.
Sarawak is also ripe with violations of the crucial principle of Free, Prior, and Informed Consent (FPIC) – required by the EUDR and enshrined in the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples (UNDRIP). Communities may have no idea that their ancestral farms and forests have been designated for forest conversion until it’s already too late.
What do Sarawak’s civil society leaders have to say about it?
NGOs and Indigenous leaders in Sarawak have long been calling attention to Malaysia’s lack of protection for Indigenous rights and self-determination. Indigenous-led organizations like SAVE Rivers and KERUAN, who work directly with communities on the ground, say that stricter protections are long overdue and have tried to make their voices heard at the EU-level to advocate for ways the EUDR can help ensure better livelihoods for forest communities.
West Malaysia-based RimbaWatch has done extensive reporting on the country’s forest conversion practices and called attention to the fact that the Malaysian government may be trying to bypass EU restrictions by shifting to industrial timber plantations. These civil society groups argue that Sarawak has serious deforestation and human rights problems – and in order for EUDR to be an effective tool for fighting forest conversion and Indigenous rights violations, the state must be classified as “high-risk.”
What would it mean for Sarawak to be designated a “high-risk” region?
While Malaysian authorities really don’t like the term “risk,” there’s simply no other way of putting it – any forest-related product originating from Sarawak faces the clear challenge of proving it’s not associated with deforestation.
If Sarawak is classified as “high-risk” under the EUDR, it would mean that timber, palm oil, and other forest-related products from the state would face stricter scrutiny before being brought into the EU market. EU companies importing these products would have to conduct more in-depth due diligence, including verifying the origin of products and ensuring they are not linked to deforestation or human rights violations. This is a huge opportunity for Sarawak to improve its land rights laws, data transparency, and certification systems to comply with EUDR standards – since failing to comply could mean they can no longer access the important EU market.
So what comes next?
No solution is perfect, and we have plenty of our own critiques about the EUDR. We believe local grassroots action has the highest potential for creating meaningful, lasting change – so as a top-down regulatory approach, the EUDR misses out on the invaluable insights, lived experiences, and solutions that Indigenous communities themselves can offer. Without prioritizing the voices of those most directly impacted by deforestation and land grabs, the regulation risks being just another policy that fails to address the root causes of environmental destruction and human rights violations.
In our ongoing efforts to advocate for Indigenous communities in Sarawak, we recently traveled to the EU alongside some of our Indigenous partners, hoping to ensure their voices were heard during critical discussions with the Malaysian and Indonesian governments. Despite facing significant challenges, we continue to push for greater transparency and accountability from all parties involved, while also raising awareness of the implications of the EUDR for Sarawak’s forests and Indigenous peoples.
Through extensive reports and persistent advocacy, we have been working tirelessly to share crucial information and amplify the concerns of Indigenous communities who are on the frontlines of deforestation. Their rights, livelihoods, and ancestral lands are at stake, and the decisions made under the EUDR could play a pivotal role in shaping their future.
You can learn more about our ongoing work and how we collaborate with Indigenous communities in Sarawak to defend their land rights and protect the region’s forests here. Our efforts focus on supporting local leadership and amplifying their voices in the fight against deforestation and exploitation. By joining us, you can play an active role in supporting the rights of these communities and preserving one of the world’s most critical ecosystems.
Read more on this story here: