São Paulo State Public Defender’s Office v. São Paulo State Land Institute Foundation (ITESP), the São Paulo State Foundation for Forest Conservation and Production (Fundação Florestal) and the State of São Paulo

On March 31, 2014, the São Paulo State Public Defender's Office (DPESP) filed a Public Civil Action (ACP) against the São Paulo State Land Institute Foundation (ITESP), the São Paulo State Foundation for Forest Conservation and Production (Fundação Florestal), and the State of São Paulo. The lawsuit seeks the annulment of the state decree that created a state park overlapping with a quilombola territory. The case highlights environmental racism as a major factor behind the marginalization of the Quilombola Community of Bombas, which has been denied its territorial rights due to the supposed incompatibility of these rights with local biodiversity protection. This is because the community's territory overlaps with the Alto Ribeira Tourist State Park (PETAR). The plaintiffs argue that the Quilombola peoples of that region are protectors of nature and have a relationship of mutual dependence with it. They, therefore, request Quilombola territorial recognition, a land survey with the removal of any third parties, the revocation or invalidation of State Decree 32.283/1958 (only regarding its impact on the Quilombola territory), the titling of the Quilombola territory, and the construction of a road providing adequate access to the community. The initial claim does not mention climate issues, which are referenced for the first time in the judgment. On December 29, 2023, a ruling was issued upholding the initial claim in favor of the Quilombola Community of Bombas, recognizing the material invalidity of Decree 32.238/1958, which created PETAR, insofar as it overlaps with the quilombola territory. The court affirmed its incompatibility with Article 68 of the Transitional Constitutional Provisions Act (ADCT) and ILO Convention 169, declaring the allocation of that territory to the state park null and void. The decision addressed the concept of environmental racism in the context of climate justice but concluded that the case resulted from a combination of social, environmental, historical, and legal factors. Additionally, the court affirmed that the relationship between traditional communities and the environment is non-conflictual. It acknowledged the urgent need to halt unrestrained human activity in ecosystems—activity that is altering climatic conditions essential for humanity’s survival. On March 5, 2024, the São Paulo State Attorney General's Office filed an appeal against the decision, contextually incorporating the climate argument. It stated that climate change is one of humanity's greatest global threats and emphasized the importance of carbon sinks in sequestering carbon and reducing the accumulation of greenhouse gases (GHG) in the atmosphere. It argued that the solution to the climate challenge lies in simple concepts, such as preserving and restoring green areas, including forests and vegetation cover. The appeal contended that investing in the conservation and sustainable management of green areas is not only an environmental necessity but also a strategic approach to addressing climate challenges and strengthening the resilience of communities (including Quilombolas). It used this argument to advocate for the continued protection of PETAR. The Fundação Florestal and ITESP also filed appeals, but without mentioning climate issues. DPESP filed counter-appeals, and all appeals are currently awaiting judgment.