Legal experts and economists tell the warning about the decline in sustainability in the European Union

Under pressure from pressure groups from companies, the European Commission discusses the rules of reshaping that govern how companies monitor and report them. Last month, French President Emmanuel Macron and German Chancellor Friedrich Mirz escalated their pregnancy against the attention of sustainability in the European Union (CSDDD), which covers the supply chains of companies, claiming that the regulations that threatened to make European companies not competitive. In a speech, Macron told business executives that CSDD should be completely “postponed”, expressing support for the “omnibus simplification package” that would eliminate companies’ requirements to monitor their supply chains for violations, remove mandatory climate transmission plans, and greatly weaken law enforcement mechanisms including civil connection provisions.

But legal and economic scholars, environmental institutions and companies, along with countries like Sweden and DenmarkI united to defend the regulations.

“The European Parliament members should not be deceived in thinking that if they remove this article, this will bring to a decrease in the regulatory burden,” said garlic Whitzer, a professor of law participating in law and financing at Oxford University and the founding director of the Sustainable Law Program at Oxford University. “What will come in its place is a very specialized scene and the differential implementation of national requirements. It will replace a well -unified commitment to a variety of different and unconfirmed obligations.”

In May, Witzar and more than 30 other legal scholars Send a message to Ec It warns that, out of reducing costs, canceling the regulations will create a set of new financial and legal risks for companies, as well as make it difficult for them to achieve their goals of sustainability and their climatic goals. Scientists warn that “without directing the regulations, climatic transformations of companies will be more disturbing and expensive.”

Moreover, Whitzer notes that many European companies have already taken steps to comply with regulations. In fact, near the beginning of the year, 11 major brands, including IKEA (F500E #85, Ingka), Marsk (F500E #70) and Unilever (F500E #49) appeared to support CSDD, signature and open message that stated: “Investment and competitiveness are established on political certainty and the ability to legal prediction. Announcing that the European Commission will present the“ OMNIBUS ”initiative that can include reviewing the risks of current legislation that undermines each of these.”

“Companies have already started setting reports frameworks to be able to agree with the organizational package,” Witzer said luck. “There has been a lot of investment in organizational architecture on the assumption that this would remain in place for a long time. If you change this regulation and exceed the simplification, you are risked that all of these investments are declining.”

Legal scholars are not the only experts who have seen an ultimate EC. Also in May, more than 90 prominent economists criticized Omnibus proposals, and they strongly refuted the allegations that sustainability regulations are harmful to European competitiveness. Instead, they refer to other factors behind the economic challenges of Europe, including the energy price crisis after Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, rejection of global demand, wage stagnation, and chronic investment in general infrastructure.

The economists’ statement confirms that the costs of implementing the sustainability regulations are small, noting that the London Economic School study was estimated at only 0.009 % of revenues. They argue that the benefits of regulations far outweigh such modest expenditures, and they also noted that with an investment gap of 750 billion euros in sustainable initiatives, weakening the requirements for reporting sustainability can undermine decisive programs such as the clean industrial deal and discourage private investment in sustainable projects.

“Economic options are political options,” said Johannes Jerge, a professor at the University of Applied Sciences. “With the suggestion of omnibus, the European Commission chooses to bother the pressure on short -sighted companies at the expense of people and the planet and long -term economic flexibility.”

To this point, many of the OMNIBUs packages framing it as an opportunistic, saying it is an attempt to imitate and US President Donald Trump who, while threatening Europe, is a program that is canceling a program of restrictions throughout America. The American companies were at the forefront Carrot exemptions From guidance for large financial companies.

“With the suggestion of omnibus, the European Commission chooses to bother the pressure on short -sighted companies at the expense of people and the planet and long -term economic flexibility.”Johannes Jerge, Professor, University of Applied Sciences BFI Vienna

Such procedures motivated European finance leaders to gather around CSDD. In February, more than 200 financial institutions represent $ 7.6 trillion of management assets, He urged EC to maintain strong sustainability criteria. Alexandra Balska, CEO of the European Sustainable Investment Forum, warned that “omnibus” would limit access to comparable and reliable sustainability data and weaken their ability to expand the scope of investments in order to remove industrial carbon.

Instead of following Trump and doubling the standard cancellation, European financial experts urged the European Union to maintain his determination, as well as his reputation in integrity. “The best response to the policies implemented in the United States is to strengthen the European Union Green Agency, not weakening it. Instead of following the Trump method, we must design our way,” said Francois Jimon, a professor at HEC PARIS and a major author of the international government team on the Sixth Evaluation Report of Climate Change.

Witzer agreed, saying that the blood university proposals harm the position of the European Union as a rational actor. He said: “The European Union proves to itself that it is a reliable organizer because they deviate in the face of political wind.” In turbulent times, suggested that a strong stability effect is needed. “We must draw our own path based on our assessment of the basics.”

But besides legal and economic effects, environmental effects and human rights are the effects of the proposed changes in the European Commission that have been subjected to the largest possible number of fire. In March, more than 360 international NGOs and civil society groups issued a joint statement against omnibus, noting that EC Ursula von der leyen president “scrutinizing human rights, workers and environmental protection for dangerous liberation.”

“The European Union itself proves that it is a reliable organizer because it fluctuates in the face of political wind …”Thom Wetzer, Associate Professor of Law and Finance, Oxford University and the founding director of the Oxford Law Program

In the comments accompanying the message, said Marion Le Pen, a policy official in the European Alliance for Corporate Justice, said: “The Brussels message cannot be more clear: Industry interests do not come first, while people and the planet are lagging behind … hundreds of civil society organizations around the world do not stop anything for evaluation.

With the transmission of the Omnibus proposal through the European Parliament, the main question is whether the European Union institutions will maintain its original ambition to direct Europe through the transfer of sustainability, or adhere to the power of pressure on companies. The result is likely to have far -reaching effects on companies’ accountability, human rights and control climate change.