petition

Public Defender’s Office of the State of Pará vs. Associação dos Ribeirinhos e Moradores and others (Project 2620 carbon credits and “forest carbon grabbing”) - petition

Litigation

Sabin

reply

Public Defender’s Office of the State of Pará vs. Associação dos Ribeirinhos e Moradores and others (Project 2620 carbon credits and “forest carbon grabbing”) - reply

Filing Year For Action

On July 19, 2023, the Public Defender's Office of the State of Pará (DPE-PA) filed a Public Civil Action (ACP) with a request for injunctive relief against Associação dos Ribeirinhos e Moradores, Sindicato dos Produtores Rurais de Portel, Amigos dos Ribeirinhos Assessoria Ambiental Eireli, Brazil Agfor LLC and the Municipality of Portel over a project that generates illegal carbon credits sold on the voluntary market. This ACP is part of a set of four lawsuits filed by the DPE-PA on the same grounds, but questioning different carbon credit projects. The Ribeirinho REDD+ Project (Project 2620), which is the subject of the lawsuit, overlaps the areas of five State Agro-Extractivist Settlement Projects (PEAEX). These PEAEX are public lands, whose real right of use is granted to traditional communities located in the municipality of Portel, in the state of Pará, which did not participate in the contested project. Project 2620 was presented to an international certifying company in 2017, but has not yet been registered, to generate REDD+ assets (credits generated by avoided deforestation, sustainable management and an increase in forest carbon stocks) for a period of thirty years. The companies and association are being sued for being responsible, developers of the project or alleged owners of the rural properties where it is located. The DPE-PA alleges irregularities in the property registrations that make up the project, and that the project does not have authorization from the state of Pará, which characterizes the grabbing of public land. In addition, the mayor of Portel issued a Public Utility Decree authorising its operation, which the DPE-PA argues is unconstitutional. It is emphasized that no prior technical study was carried out for the project. The DPE-PA argues that the defendants acted in violation of the right to traditional territory, the right to prior, free and informed consultation of traditional communities, did not comply with federal legislation on climate change, payments for environmental services and public forest concessions and did not benefit the communities directly affected by the project. It argues that the defendants' behaviour entails the duty to compensate for collective moral damage. As an injunction, the plaintiff requests (i) recognition of the possession of the lands by the traditional communities; (ii) suspension of Project 2620 and an order that the defendants refrain from entering the PEAEX. On the merits, the plaintiff requests (i) confirmation of the requests for an injunction; (ii) recognition of the right to the traditional territory; (iii) the annulment of Project 2620 and the legal transactions derived from it; (iv) an order to prohibit the defendants from entering the territories; (v) a declaration that the Public Utility Decree issued by the Municipality of Portel is null and void; (vi) an order to pay collective moral damages in the amount of R$ 5,000,000.00 to be paid into the Eastern Amazon Fund in favour of the communities of the extractivist territories of Portel.

The defendants filed their defenses. 

In December 2023, Brazil Agfor claimed that the lands of Project 2620 were not the object of land grabbing, indicating that, contrary to the DPE's claims, the community's areas unduly overlapped with private properties.  The only mention of the climate issue was limited to the potential role of carbon credit projects in reducing deforestation, mitigating the main cause of greenhouse gas emissions in Brazil. Finally, they request (i) that they be excluded from being a party to the lawsuit; (ii) that the merits of the lawsuit be completely dismissed; (iii) that the value of the lawsuit be challenged and; (iv) that an expert's report be carried out on documents relating to the properties discussed in the lawsuit. They also affirm their willingness to agree to a conduct adjustment agreement.

In May 2024, the Associação dos Ribeirinhos e Moradores claimed that it had not been shown to have acted in such a way as to cause harm. It accused the owners of Agfor of running a ‘mafia’ of fraudulent carbon projects. He claimed that the Association was manipulated by the couple through various means. 

In June 2024, the Sindicato dos Produtores Rurais de Portel claimed that the owners of Agfor had been the victim of scams, despite trying to help the local population, and that this was why the Union had accepted the proposal to develop the projects. It claimed that it was illegitimately passive and that the Castanhal Agrarian Public Defender's Office was illegitimately active. It argued that the projects are being developed in private areas, following the applicable legislation and that Project 2620 has not yet been approved and is therefore not in operation. It expressed its willingness to sign a Conduct Adjustment Agreement (TAC). Requested that the claims be dismissed.

Public Defender’s Office of the State of Pará vs. Associação dos Ribeirinhos e Moradores and others (Project 2620 carbon credits and “forest carbon grabbing”)