In light of the severity and the short timeframe that remains to take action to limit global warming to 1.5 degrees, it is important that the EU Corporate Sustainability Due Diligence Directive (CSDDD) leaves no legal ambiguity concerning corporate obligations regarding climate change.
In light of the severity and the short timeframe that remains to take action to limit global warming to 1.5 degrees, it is important that the EU Corporate Sustainability Due Diligence Directive (CSDDD) leaves no legal ambiguity concerning corporate obligations regarding climate change. The aim of this paper is to provide recommendations on Article 15 "Combating climate change" of the Commission’s proposal which lacks precision regarding the targets and content of the transition plans it refers to. The Corporate Sustainability Reporting Directive (CSRD) already provides a baseline for coherence. CSDDD should not fall behind that baseline, in order for both legislations to support the effectiveness of one another.
These recommendations on Article 15 need to be accompanied by changes to Article 3 of the proposed CSDDD, that would ensure a comprehensive approach to the definition of environmental adverse impacts. The definition should not only capture the effect that companies have on all three - the environment, climate and human rights - but also how these are interdependent and what damage prevention entails.
After three months of rushed decision-making, the European Commission presented its Omnibus Simplification Package and proposed major rollbacks to the EU’s corporate sustainability legislation, threatening to undermine Europe's leadership in sustainable business practices and ESG reporting.
With the latest leaks, it is becoming clearer and clearer that President Ursula von der Leyen and Commissioner Valdis Dombrovskis are willing to sacrifice the very foundations of the EU’s ESG legislation all whilst bypassing the due legislative process.
The expert group Frank Bold, along with Greenpeace and Friends of the Earth, has submitted a complaint to the European Commission regarding the actions of Czech authorities in setting emission limits for the Počerady coal power plant. In August 2024, a court revoked the plant's extensive emission limits derogation, and authorities were required to immediately reflect this decision in its operating permit. However, this has not yet happened. As a result, the power plant is currently violating the legal limit for mercury emissions. The complainants are calling on the Commission to investigate whether the Czech Republic’s approach to Počerady is in breach of the EU Industrial Emissions Directive (IED).
