In February 2025, the European Commission turned its back on its own sustainability commitments announcing not one, but several Omnibus packages, a roadmap to perpetuating corporate impunity. Under the guise of “simplification,” the Omnibus proposals threaten to gut key EU laws on corporate accountability—weakening climate obligations, weakening due diligence rules, and making corporate responsibility little more than a box-ticking exercise. For frontline communities facing the brunt of the climate crisis, this isn’t just bureaucratic backsliding—it’s a direct attack on their survival. 

The Commission claims that it conducted “reality checks” with stakeholders to ensure that changes are pragmatic and responsive to society’s needs. But whose reality is being considered? Today, we talk with Nick Omonuk, Ugandan climate justice activist and defender who has seen firsthand how corporate greed, weak regulation, and political complicity fuel environmental destruction. He knows the cost of deregulation—and why the EU must uphold, not dismantle, corporate accountability laws. 

A: I come from a family of 12 siblings growing up in Balisa, a rural district in Uganda, where life revolved around farming and livestock. As a young boy in our unprivileged tribe, I took the responsibility to look after our livestock, meaning that I used to go with my cousin to get water and food for the animals. It was very difficult when there was too much sunshine for instance, not only because of exhaustion of walking all day long avoiding the heat but also because resources were limited. 

Back then, we didn’t have the language to describe what was happening. We weren’t talking about ‘climate change’—we were talking about the land drying up, the rivers running empty, our crops failing, and families were forced to move. We were living it before we had a name for it. Some said it was a curse from the gods, but later, I understood: this was climate change, and behind it were corporations’ extraction, and environmental destruction making billions off our suffering. But I could only learn that years later, when I joined university. 

I started the program in land economic, and I got to learn about land rights and land policies in Uganda. Of course, I immediately connected it to my reality back in Balisa, the challenge my people faces and how unfair is for my community to be responsible to tackle the impacts of climate change. For instance, at that time, my dad started selling eggs to feed our family as an alternative to livestock, but there were other families who could not even count on that to generate any income. 

At first, it was difficult for my family to understand the fight I was starting to defend. They wanted me to stop, that I was putting my life at risk – in fact, it was around the time of abductions. But I was performing well at the university and even graduated, I didn’t fail to do anything because of my activism, and, against all odds, my family realised and accepted that I was a climate justice activist. But I learned from their worry to change my tactics, for instance how and to whom I communicate about EACOP to protect myself. 

A: Irresponsible corporations don’t just extract resources; they extract life. They displace people, destroy livelihoods, and pollute the water and soil we depend on. When they leave, all that remains is devastation. I’ve seen families forced off their land with no compensation. I’ve seen rivers poisoned by industrial waste. These companies know exactly what they’re doing, but they don’t care—because the system protects them, not us, we are the ones treated like criminals. 

When the European Union announced the CSDDDD, I understood this shift as a narrative and mindset change: until that moment, corporations never took responsibility, our communities were always blamed. The example of Total’s project in Mozambique or Apple’ subsidiaries and their mineral extraction in the Democratic Republic of Congo: it’s a European company operating because our African countries don’t have these manufacturing companies or these processing plants. But it is also our countries the ones that do not have these laws on corporate due diligence because it’s not our companies operating there. It a vicious circle but the result is systemic: our communities are left behind unprotected and facing the negative impact of harmful corporate greed. It’s a long-term barbaric act. 

This is not just about us the people. It is about the protection of our land, our biodiversity and environment — there are already reports materialising the responsibility of big corporations on deforestation, for instance. I want to live in a world where I can happily walk on the street and listen to a bird tweeting. But this reality can only happen if we regulate big corporations and tackle corporate impunity. 

A: Laws like the CSDDD putting the spotlight on corporative neglections and giving legal tools for victims to seek justice were game changers. The CSDDD was already watered down when it passed, it should be even stronger including different sectors like financial institutions who play a key role in corporate abuses. But it was a start, it meant progress.  

But with this simplification, what the Commission is really doing is making corporate impunity the norm. Making laws simpler isn’t the same as dismantling them. This isn’t simplification, it’s deregulation, plain and simple. Weakening climate [obligations] is pure hypocrisy, it’s a death sentence for our communities. Companies are the biggest contributors to the climate crisis, but instead of holding them accountable, the Commission is letting them off the hook. Meanwhile, it’s us [rural communities in Uganda] who bear the impact of the destruction. 

Let’s be honest: who benefits from making it easier for corporations to exploit people and the planet? Not my community. Not the farmers being displaced. Not the children growing up with no future because of climate disasters. If the Omnibus proposals pass, they will give a free pass for polluters and be a direct attack on victims and communities. Europe talks about a ‘just transition’—but what’s just about sacrificing the Global South to protect corporate profits? To me, this pushback against EU sustainability laws after all the improvements sounds like “Europe can and will protect itself, but the rest of the world can die from climate change.” This is not humanity, this is barbaric.

A: Because of where I come from, I know that climate justice is about who causes impacts from climate change and how it harms people’s life: how livelihoods are affected by droughts, how to earn fair incomes that allows families to send their children to school education, accessing food during crisis… And for me, since big corporations have a massive role causing harm, climate justice is about them being hold responsible and accountable.  

Those with the power want us to believe that change is impossible, but history proves otherwise. The only way we lose is if we stop fighting. And I refuse. Fighting for climate justice isn’t a choice, it’s survival. We’re not asking for favours, we’re demanding what’s right.

The Commission claims #Omnibus is based on “reality checks”. But whose reality is being considered?

We spoke w/Nick Omonuk, Ugandan climate justice activist who knows the cost of deregulation—& why the EU must uphold not dismantle, corporate accountability laws

corporatejustice.org/news/intervi…

[image or embed]

— European Coalition for Corporate Justice (ECCJ) (@eccjorg.bsky.social) March 25, 2025 at 11:56 AM