- Climate Litigation Database
- /
- Search
- /
- Brazil
- /
- Rio Grande do Sul
- /
- Public Ministry of the State of Rio Grande do Sul vs. State of Rio Grande do Sul and FEPAM (Carbochemical Complex)
Public Ministry of the State of Rio Grande do Sul vs. State of Rio Grande do Sul and FEPAM (Carbochemical Complex)
About this case
Filing year
2019
Status
Decided
Geography
Court/admin entity
Brazil → Rio Grande do Sul → Rio Grande do Sul State Court
Case category
–
Principal law
Brazil → 520/2000) (Rio Grande do Sul)Brazil → CONAMA Resolution No. 01/86Brazil → CONAMA Resolution No. 237 of 1997Brazil → Federal Constitution of 1988Brazil → Gaucho Policy on Climate Change – PGMC (State Law No. 13.594 of 2010) (Rio Grande do Sul)Brazil → National Climate Change Policy (Law No. 12187 of 2009)Brazil → National Environmental Policy Act (Law No. 6.938 of 1981)Brazil → State Constitution of Rio Grande do SulBrazil → State Environmental Code (State Law No. 11.520 of 2000) (Rio Grande do Sul)Brazil → State Policy on Climate Change – PEMC (State Law No. 13.798 of 2009)
At issue
The Public Prosecutor’s Office seeks to declare the illegality of the construction of the Carbon Chemical Complex in Rio Grande do Sul and the implementation of the State Policy on Mineral Coal
Topics
, ,
Documents
Filing Date
Document
Type
Topics
Beta
Search results
03/21/2023
Petition
–
09/01/2019
Initial petition from Rio Grande do Sul Public Prosecutor’s Office (MPRS) (in Portuguese)
Petition
–
Summary
On November 12, 2019, the Rio Grande do Sul Public Prosecutor’s Office (MPRS) filed a Public Civil Action (environmental class-action) against the State of Rio Grande do Sul and the State Environmental Agency (Fundação Estadual de Proteção Ambiental Henrique Luís Roessler – FEPAM). It seeks to prevent the implementation of the Carbon Chemical Complex in the State as well as the State Policy on Mineral Coal. The MPRS questions the lack of popular participation, especially through public hearings, in the legislative process of State Law 15.047/2017, which authorized the construction of the Carbon Chemical Pole and created the State Policy for Mineral Coal. In addition, it argues that there should be a prior Environmental Impact Assessment (EIS) for the implementation of the Pole, considering the climate impacts of the activities on the site, which will be placed in the complexes of Baixo Jacuí and Campanha, and a Strategic Environmental Assessment before its institution, which must consider the synergistic and global effects of all the activities. The author adds that the policy encourages the use of a highly impactful energy matrix regarding the emission of greenhouse gases (GHG). The MPRS emphasizes the proximity of the carbon-chemical complexes to protected areas and cities. The author alleges that the implementation of the Pole considers only the EIS specific to the Guaíba Mine, not taking into account the entire complex. It argues that the State Law does not consider, among other issues, environmental protection, at odds with the federal and state legislation on climate change. The granting of an injunction is required to prevent, among other measures, (i) the implementation of the State Policy on Mineral Coal and the establishment of the Pole and (ii) the issuance of an environmental license for an enterprise inserted in complexes, up to the realization of public hearings and the development of an EIS and a Strategic Environmental Assessment, prior to the implementation of the Carbon Chemical Pole and the State Policy on Mineral. On a definitive basis, the author requires the confirmation of preliminary injunctions to declare the illegality of the legislative process that led to the State Law.
Subsequently, the legal action 9019860-68.2020.8.21.0001, filed by Arayara Association of Education and Culture and by the Colony of Fishermen Z-5, was reunited to this lawsuit due to the connection between the demands. On June 12, 2022, the process migrated to another electronic system of the Court, being reported as 5091523-82.2019.8.21.0001.
On March 21st, 2023, the MPRS, FEPAM and the state of Rio Grande do Sul filed a joint petition requesting that an agreement be ratified to put an end to the lawsuit. They considered that the factual, technical, political and legal circumstances that led to the filing of this public civil action had changed significantly during the case, with changes in the state's energy scenario. They claimed that there is no concrete indication that the state is going to adopt a State Mineral Coal Policy or set up a Carbochemical Hub. In the agreement, the state took on the duty to draw up a new term of reference before initiatives to implement or license a policy that adopts these fossil sources or an enterprise, and to contract a comprehensive Strategic Environmental Assessment to support decision-making processes. The agreement was ratified and the case was dismissed.
Topics mentioned most in this case Beta
See how often topics get mentioned in this case and view specific passages of text highlighted in each document. Accuracy is not 100%. Learn more
Group
Topics
Policy instrument
Risk
Impacted group
Just transition
Renewable energy
Fossil fuel
Greenhouse gas
Economic sector
Adaptation/resilience
Finance