Federal Public Prosecutor’s Office v. Paulo de Lima Paulo (Deforestation and climate damage in the PAE Antimary)

On June 24, 2021, the Federal Public Prosecutor's Office (MPF) filed a Civil Public Action (CPA) against Joel de Souza for deforesting an area of 146.75 hectares between 2011 and 2020, in Boca do Acre, Amazonas. The MPF alleges that the defendant's occupation of the land was illegal because it was part of an Agro-Extractivist Settlement Project (PAE), owned and managed by the National Institute for Colonization and Agrarian Reform (INCRA) and occupied by traditional extractivist communities. This ACP is part of a set of 22 lawsuits filed by the MPF as a result of the investigation carried out in Civil Inquiry No. 1.13.000.001719/2015-49 into illegal deforestation carried out inside the Antimary Agro-Extractivist Settlement Project (PAE) but against different defendants. The lawsuit is based, among other things, on Brazilian environmental law concerning the constitutional protection of the environment, the accusation of deforestation, propter rem civil liability for environmental damage, including climate damage, and collective moral damages. It also mentions the unauthorized emissions of Greenhouse Gases (GHG) caused by the illegal deforestation of the area, calculated at 78,938.61 tons of carbon dioxide and which are directly related to the Brazilian State's departure from its climate goals, out of step with national and international commitments made by Brazil in the National Policy on Climate Change - PNMC (Federal Law 12.187/2009) and in the Paris Agreement (promulgated by Federal Decree 9.073/2017). Among other requests: (i) reparation for the damage caused by illegal deforestation; (ii) payment of compensation corresponding to intermediate and residual material environmental damage; (iv) payment of compensation corresponding to climate damage; and (v) payment of compensation corresponding to collective moral damage.

Subsequently, INCRA was included in the active party as a co-litigant assistant to the plaintiff.

A judgment was issued recognizing the relationship between deforestation and climate change, presenting extensive arguments on climate change and civil liability for climate damage, acknowledging said damage in the case. The requests were partially granted, condemning the defendant: a) to fulfill the obligation to restore the degraded area according to the Degraded Area Recovery Plan (PRAD); b) to the obligation not to act, consisting of a prohibition on the use of the area by the defendant, in order to allow natural regeneration; c) to pay compensation for material damages related to interim and residual environmental damages, the value of which will be subject to settlement of judgment; d) to pay compensation for climate damages caused by deforestation, in the amount of R$ 1,957,677.57, using as a basis for calculating the amount of carbon emitted the Technical Note prepared by the Amazon Research Institute (IPAM) and, for pricing purposes, the value of 5 dollars per ton, according to the Amazon Fund; e) to the payment of compensation for collective moral damages, in the amount of 5% of the total material damages determined in the settlement of the judgment. Finally, it declared the respective CAR null and void and allocated all the resources obtained to the Fund for Diffuse Rights.

The judgment became final and the case entered the enforcement phase.