Rio de Janeiro Public Prosecutor’s Office vs. Rio de Janeiro Municipality

In April, 2026, the Public Prosecutor's Office of the State of Rio de Janeiro (MPRJ) filed a Public Civil Action (ACP), with a request for urgent relief against the Municipality of Rio de Janeiro to regulate the assessment of climate impacts and require climate diagnostic studies in environmental licensing processes, and to demand mitigation and compensation measures in projects that cause significant greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions in the city. The plaintiff argues that recurring extreme weather events place the fight against climate change at the center of the state's duties of environmental protection and that the Municipality of Rio de Janeiro, in Article 25 of Municipal Law 5.248/2011—which establishes the Municipal Policy on Climate Change and Sustainable Development—stipulates that environmental licenses for projects with significant GHG emissions will be linked to the presentation of an emissions mitigation plan and compensation measures. It is argued that despite this provision, the application of this rule is nonexistent, constituting an administrative omission, which hinders the proper assessment of impacts and the effectiveness of the municipal climate policy.

The complaint alleges that, in September 2024, the Public Prosecutor's Office of Rio de Janeiro (MPRJ) issued Recommendation No. 02/2024 to the city's mayor, requesting, among other measures, the enactment of a regulatory act implementing Article 25 of Municipal Law 5.248/2011 within 90 days. In March 2025, a Technical Opinion from the Municipal Attorney General's Office concluded that the aforementioned article should be regulated by law and not by decree. It is argued that this opinion suggested the creation of a Working Group to discuss the issue, with the consequent formulation of a legislative proposal to be submitted to the City Council; however, up to the date of writing the initial petition, the MPRJ was unaware of the creation of the group.

It is noteworthy that the city of Rio de Janeiro ranks 8th among the largest greenhouse gas (GHG) emitting municipalities in Brazil, with significant emissions from the waste, energy, and industrial processes sectors, all of which are subject to environmental licensing. It is also important to highlight that, between 2023 and 2025, there were significant local impacts of climate change from events such as intense rainfall, flash floods, and inundations, demonstrating that climate stability is inseparable from the protection of life and the well-being of the population. It is no coincidence that the city of Rio de Janeiro, through Municipal Law 7.315/2022, recognized the state of global climate emergency as a factor threatening humanity.

Additionally, the complaint argues that international jurisprudence recognizes a stable climate as a fundamental human right, and Advisory Opinion 32/2025 (PC-32/2025) of the Inter-American Court of Human Rights (IACHR) recognized global warming as a violation of human rights. Finally, it argues that the requirement for emissions diagnostics/reporting must meet minimum technical criteria to ensure that the potential climate impacts of a given project are truly known and addressed in environmental licensing processes. As such, it requests that Article 25 be regulated as an urgent measure within a period not exceeding 120 days. This would make the granting and renewal of environmental licenses for projects with significant GHG emissions contingent on the presentation of an emissions mitigation plan and compensation measures, duly preceded by climate studies that ensure the identification and measurement of the impacts of activities and projects, the analysis of locational and technological alternatives, and the adoption of mitigation and compensation measures in all phases of the licensing process. It is further requested that, should the 120-day period pass without regulation, the Municipality begin requiring projects with significant GHG emissions to present an emissions mitigation plan and compensation measures duly preceded by climate studies in the licensing or renewal process. On the merits, confirmation of the requests made in the preliminary injunction is requested, making them definitive.