In September, 2025, the Federal Public Prosecutor's Office (MPF) filed a Public Civil Action (ACP) with a request for urgent relief filed by against the Brazilian Institute of Environment and Renewable Natural Resources (IBAMA) and Petróleo Brasileiro SA (Petrobras), due to the granting of authorization for Pre-Operational Assessment (APO) in Block FZA-M-59, located in the Foz do Amazonas Basin, a stage prior to the license for drilling offshore oil wells. The objective is to annul Decision Order No. 33/2025/Gabin, issued by the President of IBAMA, which granted the authorization and the non-issuance of an operating license for well drilling until the licensing irregularities are remedied. 

The Federal Public Prosecutor's Office (MPF) argues that the aforementioned Decision Order is null and void because it contradicts environmental licensing regulations, international obligations, and a technical opinion from the agency itself, which recommended the denial of the license due to serious flaws in the Oiled Fauna Protection and Care Plan (PPAF). Furthermore, the nullity is based on the absence of an Environmental Assessment of the Sedimentary Area (AAAS), the failure to conduct prior, free, and informed consultations with the affected indigenous, quilombola, traditional fishing, and riverside communities, and the failure to consider some of these communities in the environmental studies, despite the prediction of various impacts on them, in violation of ILO Convention No. 169 and the Federal Constitution. It further argues that the licensing documents do not consider extreme weather events, violating IBAMA regulations, the National Policy on Climate Change, and the Forest Code. The argument is that the authorization granted violates the precautionary and preventive principles, representing a serious risk to the populations and coastal ecosystems of the Amazon River mouth, a region that shelters mangroves and reefs. It maintains that IBAMA's decision ignores the global climate emergency and the international commitments undertaken by Brazil, such as the Paris Agreement, and that the expansion of oil exploration goes against the energy transition and decarbonization policy, perpetuating an unsustainable model based on fossil fuels, which affects Brazil's credibility on the international climate agenda, especially on the eve of COP-30. Thus, the authorization granted without climate impact studies and without AAAS would put Brazil in breach of its commitments to mitigate climate change. In provisional relief, it requests (i) the immediate suspension of Order No. 33/2025/Gabin, or, subsidiarily, the prohibition of granting the Operating License (LO) until the necessary environmental and climate studies are carried out, as well as free, prior and informed consultation with the affected communities; (ii) the prohibition of Petrobras or related companies from entering the villages located in the Uaçá, Galibi and Juminã Indigenous Territories without prior authorization from FUNAI. On the merits, it requests the definitive annulment of the order and the acts resulting therefrom and the suspension of the licensing until the identified nullities are remedied.

The preliminary injunction was partially granted by the 1st Federal Civil Court of the SJAP, which upheld the authorization of the APO, but ordered Petrobras to refrain from direct contact with indigenous and traditional communities without the presence of FUNAI.

The Federal Public Prosecutor's Office filed an interlocutory appeal with the TRF1 (1025450-83.2025.4.01.0000), seeking the complete suspension of the authorization.

In its defense, IBAMA requested the complete dismissal of the plaintiff's claims, with recognition of the legality of Decision Order No. 33/2025/Gabin and the regularity of the environmental licensing. It argued that the challenged act was technically sound and without any illegality. Finally, it requested the full maintenance of the licensing and the denial of the injunction sought by the Federal Public Prosecutor's Office.

Petrobras, in its defense, requested that the claims be dismissed due to a lack of factual and legal grounds to support them. The defense was based on the legality of the environmental licensing process conducted by IBAMA, the absence of procedural irregularities or violation of indigenous rights, and finally, it maintained compliance with all applicable legal and technical requirements.

In December 2025, a judgment was issued dismissing the claims. The court held that the absence of an Environmental Assessment of Sedimentary Areas (AAAS) does not impact the preparation of the environmental license, arguing that IBAMA's decision in the environmental licensing should be upheld, and there is no need to correct the absence of an AAAS for the Amazon River mouth. It further argued that the allegation that there was no presentation and analysis of meso- and microscale phenomena and extreme climatic phenomena for the project is unfounded, since the report presented by the plaintiff acknowledged that the mathematical models used by Petrobras were the most appropriate currently available. 

It decided that there is no direct environmental impact on indigenous, quilombola, and artisanal fishing communities, given that the project is located 179 km off the coast of Amapá, so there is no obligation to prepare studies on indigenous and quilombola components. Thus, the environmental impacts of the project on traditional communities were considered indirect and would not have drastic consequences for the communities' traditional way of life. It was argued that the project could bring economic development, opportunities, and expansion of social infrastructure to these communities, and that the precautionary principle cannot be taken as an absolute principle so as to frustrate the legitimate expectation regarding the use of natural resources, with the generation of wealth and development. The conflict between oil exploration and environmental protection was weighed according to the specific situation, and thus economic development was prioritized, understanding that there is no greater environmental risk than the explorations that occur in the seas around the world. Finally, it was considered that, due to the energy transition, oil will become worthless and, therefore, Brazil should take advantage of the historical and technological window to immediately benefit from its natural resources.

The Federal Public Prosecutor's Office filed an appeal against the ruling, arguing, in summary, that the process constitutes a true climate dispute and that the environmental licensing of drilling in Block FZA-M-59 presents serious flaws capable of compromising environmental and climate protection. The Prosecutor's Office argues that the absence of an Environmental Assessment of Sedimentary Areas (AAAS), the insufficiency of studies on sensitive ecosystems, especially the Amazon Reef System, the lack of adequate assessment of impacts on indigenous peoples, quilombola communities, riverside dwellers, and artisanal fishermen, as well as the inadequate incorporation of the climate component in the licensing process, prevent the assessment of the environmental viability of the project. It further argues that the activity could generate a significant increase in greenhouse gas emissions, in violation of the National Policy on Climate Change and international commitments undertaken by Brazil, such as the Paris Agreement. The appeal also highlights the occurrence of a drilling fluid leak after the ruling was issued as a supervening event that would demonstrate flaws in the emergency plans and reinforce the environmental risks associated with the project. In light of this, in the context of an appeal, the Federal Public Prosecutor's Office requested the suspension of Operating License No. 1684/2025, arguing that environmental damage has already occurred and that the emergency plans have proven insufficient to guarantee the safety of the activity. It also requests recognition of the claim as a climate dispute. On the merits, it pleaded for: (i) the annulment of Operating License No. 1684/2025 due to alleged irregularities in the environmental licensing process; (ii) recognition of the incompatibility of the project with international environmental and climate commitments undertaken by Brazil, including the Paris Agreement; and (iii) the carrying out of new environmental studies and the revision of the project's area of influence, conditioning the continuation of oil exploration on the holding of prior, free and informed consultations with potentially affected indigenous peoples and traditional communities.

The Federal Public Defender's Office (DPU), acting as custos vulnerabilis, filed an appeal against the judgment, arguing that the appealed decision disregarded the fundamental rights of indigenous, quilombola, riverside, and artisanal fishing communities potentially affected by the project, as well as the environmental and climatic risks associated with oil exploration in the Amazon River estuary. The DPU argues that the licensing is illegal due to the absence of an Environmental Assessment of Sedimentary Areas (AAAS), the lack of Indigenous and Quilombola Component Studies, and the absence of prior, free, and informed consultations with traditional communities. It further argues that the case should be recognized as a true climate dispute, since the impacts resulting from oil exploration in a region of high ecological sensitivity fall disproportionately on vulnerable populations, in violation of the principles of climate justice, environmental precaution, and the international obligations assumed by Brazil. It argues that authorizing the activity without adopting the necessary environmental safeguards compromises the intergenerational protection of the environment and ignores the potential climatic and ecosystemic impacts of fossil fuel exploration in a strategic area of the Amazon.

Ministério Público Federal vs. IBAMA e Petrobras (Suspension of the licence for the Pre-Operational Assessment in the Amazon River mouth area)

<p>This entry was provided by the Sabin Center for Climate Change Law. Please see the terms of use for citation and licensing of third party data.</p>

Ministério Público Federal vs. IBAMA e Petrobras (Suspension of the licence for the Pre-Operational Assessment in the Amazon River mouth area) - appeal

Filed

The Climate Litigation Database

Find climate change litigation data and indicators for {text}.

{text} litigation

Sabin Center for Climate Change Law provides Climate Litigation Database, a comprehensive database of US and Global climate change caselaw

Quickly and easily search through the complete text of thousands of climate change law and policy documents from every country.

Search the Climate Litigation Database

An aim to achieve a quantifiable outcome within a given time-frame, set by an institution such as a national government.

Policy instruments are techniques or tools used by governing authorities to promote certain policies in order to achieve predetermined goals. Put simply, instruments are how a government tries to achieve its goals, with this taxonomy being focused on national policy instruments.

Risk is the potential for adverse consequences resulting from the dynamic interplay between (climate-related) hazards, exposure, and vulnerability of affected human or ecological systems.

Groups  of people who are adversely affected by climate change or the response to it

A set of principles, processes, and practices that build economic and political power to shift from an extractive economy to a regenerative economy.

Justice is the ethical and political framework that addresses fairness, including issues of responsibility, rights, and structural inequity.

Renewable energy means all forms of energy produced from renewable sources in a sustainable manner.

Fossil fuel is a generic term for non-renewable energy sources such as coal, fossil gas, and oil (including crude oil, and petroleum products), that can be used for electricity and heat generation. Fossil fuels are hydrocarbons formed from pressurised and heated organic material buried over millions of years.

Molecules in the atmosphere that play a key role in the greenhouse effect by trapping heat radiating from Earth’s surface.

Area of the economy in which actors engage in identical or related activities.

In human systems, the process of adjustment to actual or expected climate change and its effects, in order to moderate harm, increase resilience or exploit beneficial opportunities. In natural systems, the process of adjustment to actual climate change and its effects; human intervention may facilitate adjustment to expected climate change and its effects.

The management and allocation of funds, assets and investments to meet various objectives

People who are less able to respond to the effects of climate change due to having limited financial or physical assets

A company that is owned wholly or partially by the state, typically operating in key sectors.

Using laws and the legal system more broadly to protect vulnerable entities

Terrestrial means "of the earth" and relates to the risks to ecological system that includes all living organisms and their interactions within land-based environments, such as forests, grasslands, and deserts.

Oil is a combustible liquid fossil fuel composed mainly of hydrocarbons, occurring as crude oil and refined into petroleum products such as petrol, diesel and kerosene.

Fossil gas, commonly known as natural gas, is a fossil fuel consisting chiefly of methane with smaller amounts of other hydrocarbons and trace gases, found in underground deposits.

People with different national or cultural traditions from the dominant population

Social and cultural groups that share collective ancestral ties to the lands and natural resources where they live, occupy or from which they have been displaced

Activities of industries that extract natural resources, such as mining, oil, and gas, for commercial use.

This sector creates and distributes information and entertainment through television, radio, print, and digital platforms.

This sector involves activities that impart knowledge and skills to individuals, including formal schooling, vocational training and educational support.

Activities of government agencies and institutions that provide public services, enforce laws and manage public resources.

This sector includes firms and individuals offering specialised expertise in fields such as law, accounting, consulting, science and engineering.

Activities involving the management, development, and sale of property assets.

Climate change impacts our society by disrupting the natural, economic and social systems we depend on. Physical hazards and underlying vulnerabilities can lead to increased resource competition for food and water, which can heighten the risk of conflict.

Ministério Público Federal vs. IBAMA e Petrobras (Suspension of the licence for the Pre-Operational Assessment in the Amazon River mouth area) - appeal

Risk

Impacted group

Just transition

Fossil fuel

Economic sector

Adaptation/resilience

Finance