- Climate Litigation Database
- /
- Search
- /
- Brazil
- /
- Rio Grande do Sul
- /
- Federal Public Prosecutor’s Office and ANAB v. Federal Government and others (Structural litigation over climate disaster in Rio Grande do Sul)
Federal Public Prosecutor’s Office and ANAB v. Federal Government and others (Structural litigation over climate disaster in Rio Grande do Sul)
About this case
Filing year
2024
Status
Pending
Geography
Court/admin entity
Brazil → Rio Grande do Sul → Rio Grande do Sul Federal Court
Case category
Suits against governments → Failure to adapt
Principal law
Brazil → City Statute (Federal Law No. 10.257 of 2001)Brazil → Federal Constitution of 1988Brazil → National Environmental Policy Act (Law No. 6.938 of 1981)Brazil → National Policy on Climate Change – PNMC (Federal Law No. 12.187 of 2009)Brazil → National Policy on Water ResourcNational Policy on Water Resources (Law No. 9.433 of 1997)es (Law 9 433/97)
At issue
The CPA seeks to recognize governmental omission/inefficiency in disasters that have occurred, and to determine structural measures for better coordination between federal entities in the implementation of public policies for climate adaptation and disaster preparedness and response.
Documents
Filing Date
Document
Type
06/11/2024
Complaint
Summary
On June 6, 2024, the Federal Public Prosecutor's Office (MPF) filed a Civil Public Action (CPA) with a request for an injunction against the Federal Government, the state of Rio Grande do Sul (RS) and nine municipalities in the Taquari Valley (RS) due to climatic events that occurred between September and November 2023 and April and May 2024. Subsequently, the National Association of Dam-Affected People (ANAB) was also allowed to join the lawsuit.
The CPA is seeking for the recognition of governmental omission/inefficiency in the disasters that occurred, and the determination of structural measures for better coordination between the federal entities in the implementation of public policies for climate adaptation and disaster adaptation and response. It is claimed that the state of Rio Grande do Sul has been victimized by disasters, the frequency and intensity of which are increasing due to climate change. It is argued that the flooding in the municipalities of the Taquari Valley demonstrates the existence of flawed climate governance whose emergency response and prevention systems are inadequate for crises. In contrast, it is argued that effective management of extreme events requires coordinated action between the different sectoral policies and the federal, state and municipal levels of government intending to prevent new disasters and recover affected areas. Moreover, the predictability of the event and human action are stated as important elements in potentiating the disaster, giving rise to civil liability of the defendants for damages caused, without the possibility of invoking any exclusion of causality. It is mentioned that the action aims to guarantee climate justice, recognizing that extreme weather events have a more severe impact on vulnerable communities, which have contributed less to GHG emissions and have fewer resources to adapt and recover.
Thus, it is stated that mitigation strategies must be implemented simultaneously with climate adaptation measures, a duty expressly established in Article 4 of the National Policy on Climate Change (PNMC). It is argued that only with sustainable urban planning strategies, with the active participation of communities and based on the best techniques, will it be possible to build resilient solutions capable of reducing vulnerabilities to disasters. This requires structural and non-structural measures to control flooding and urban drainage systems, the revision of City Planning, the improvement of warning and hydrological control systems and the training of communities. Considering this panorama, the preliminary injunction requires compliance with a series of immediate measures listed in the initial petition to deal with the crisis. Medium and long-term measures are also listed, which are not exhaustive, to establish initial parameters for a joint solution to the issue with the other defendants. Thus, in the final instance, it is requested (i) that the defendants be ordered, with the active participation of the social groups affected, to draw up a restructuring plan, through incremental, successive and/or simultaneous measures, for the areas affected, with due regard for climate adaptation and resilience; (ii) that the form of participation of the groups affected be established; (iii) that a dynamic be established for monitoring the restructuring plan by a committee with representatives from segments of civil society and the government.