Rio Grande do Norte

Brazil

Piauí

Paraná

Rio de Janeiro

Rondônia

Roraima

Acre

Rio Grande do Sul

Alagoas

Santa Catarina

Amazonas

Sergipe

Amapá

São Paulo

Bahia

Tocantins

Ceará

Distrito Federal

Espírito Santo

Goiás

Maranhão

Minas Gerais

Mato Grosso do Sul

Mato Grosso

Pará

Paraíba

Pernambuco

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

In December 2025, the Federal Public Prosecutor’s Office (MPF) filed a Public Civil Action (ACP) against the Municipality of Natal, the Natal City Council, the Rio Grande do Norte Institute for Sustainable Development and the Environment (IDEMA), and the Rio Grande do Norte Legislative Assembly (ALRN). The MPF intends to protect the Permanent Preservation Areas (APPs) along Natal’s coastal strip and the associated coastal ecosystem, consisting of dunes, sandbars, and coastal plains—natural barriers against erosion and the ongoing advance of the sea. 

The MPF argues that the recently approved set of regulations—comprising the Natal Master Plan (Municipal Complementary Law 208/2022), Municipal Law 7,801/2024, State Law 12,079/2025, Normative Instruction 002/2025-GS/SEMURB, and the legislation approved by Bill 662/2025—has relaxed land use and occupation regulations along the Rio Grande do Norte coast, allowing mixed-use and multifamily residential developments to be established in areas of high ecological sensitivity, which were previously considered non-buildable areas under federal law. It is argued that the contested municipal and state regulations improperly set aside the protective framework established at the federal level, notably the Forest Code, the Atlantic Forest Law, and the National Coastal Management Plan, and violate the principles of prevention, precaution, and the prohibition against environmental degradation. According to studies conducted by experts from the Federal University of Rio Grande do Norte (UFRN) and the technical unit of the MPF, land use within these APPs intensifies erosion processes and increases the risk of flooding during extreme weather events, a situation exacerbated by legislative changes and the climate emergency the regulations have ignored. The MPF argues that the legislative process contains irregularities because it disregards the requirement for free, prior, and informed consultation with potentially affected traditional communities, thereby violating ILO Convention No. 169; it also lacks public participation and compromises the assessment of environmental and social impacts, especially along the Natal coastline, a region that includes territories occupied by traditional coastal communities, recognized by the Master Plan as Special Areas of Social Interest (AEIS). In this regard, the MPF maintains that the local relaxation of restrictions on occupation of the Coastal Road is invalid and increases the population’s exposure to the impacts of climate change, putting them at risk. 

Plaintiff requests, as a preliminary measure: (i) the suspension of the effects of the contested provisions and of the environmental permits issued in the area since the new Master Plan took effect; (ii) that the defendants refrain from issuing new regulatory or administrative acts that disregard or violate the status of the Natal Coastal Road as a Protected Area (APP); (iii) that the defendants monitor, prevent, and issue fines for any new interventions in the Natal Coastal Road area that disregard the site’s status as a Protected Area (APP). On the merits, the Court is requested to annul the contested regulations, the environmental permits issued for the Natal Coastal Strip during the term of the Natal Master Plan that are not accompanied by an EIA/RIMA and are in violation of the Forest Code, and the inter-agency development of an Environmental Protection and Management Plan for the Natal Coastal Strip that considers, among other points, mitigation and adaptation measures to address erosion processes in the region.

In May, 2025, the Federation of Rural Workers, Farmers and Family Farmers of the State of Rio Grande do Norte (FETARN), the Unified Workers' Central - Rio Grande do Norte (CUT-RN), and the Rural and Urban Assistance Service (SAR) filed a Public Civil Action (ACP) combined with a Collective Civil Action (ACC), against Voltalia Energia do Brasil Ltda. and Voltalia S/A. Plaintiffs argue that the implementation of wind power plants has been causing negative impacts on the inhabitants of the region. It is alleged that the municipality of Serra do Mel currently has 40 wind farm projects, 36 of which are operational and 4 that have not yet started, and that Defendants are responsible for the socio-environmental impacts resulting from the wind farm projects in the municipality of Serra do Mel/RN, and should bear the homogeneous non-pecuniary damages suffered by the represented parties, as well as the collective and diffuse damages resulting from their activity, ensuring full reparation, with mitigation and compensation for the damages caused. 

Through this lawsuit, Plaintiffs seek: (i) the granting of urgent relief to suspend the installation and operation of new projects, order the preparation of an EIA/RIMA (Environmental Impact Assessment/Environmental Impact Report), the relocation of towers near residences, and the provision of psychological and medical support to those affected; (ii) the condemnation of the defendants to pay compensation for collective environmental moral damages, in the minimum amount of R$ 106,425,000.00; (iii) Defendants be ordered to pay compensation for homogeneous individual moral damages, in the minimum amount of R$ 100,000.00 per affected substitute; (iv) the rebalancing of the lease agreements, limiting the lease to 50% of the property; (v) Defendants be ordered to pay compensation for homogeneous individual moral damages arising from the excessive burden of the contracts, in the minimum amount of R$ 100,000.00 per substitute; among others.

In a statement acting as custos vulnerabilis, the Public Defender's Office of the State of Rio Grande do Norte, through the Group for Action for a Just Energy Transition (GATEJ), requested to join the proceedings to ensure the protection of the rights of vulnerable communities affected by the expansion of wind power projects. It argues that the energy transition and decarbonization of the energy matrix, while essential to addressing climate change, must observe the paradigm of climate justice and a just energy transition. Relying on the Federal Constitution, international treaties, and Advisory Opinion 32/2025 (PC-32/2025) of the Inter-American Court of Human Rights (IACHR), it defends that the right to a clean, healthy, and safe climate requires (i) compatibility between the promotion of renewable energies and the protection of human rights, through the assessment of cumulative socio-environmental impacts; (ii) effective participation of affected communities; (iii) free, prior, and informed consultation, observance of community protocols; and (iv) the adoption of environmental due diligence measures by companies and the State. Finally, the Public Defender's Office requests its admission to the case as custos vulnerabilis, the granting of a deadline to present supplementary statements after investigations with the affected communities, authorization to participate in the procedural instruction by monitoring the evidence, preparing technical notes and promoting spaces for dialogue, as well as recognition of its legitimacy to foster extrajudicial solutions, including through TACs and agreements aimed at repairing socio-environmental damages and guaranteeing a just energy transition.

In their defense, Voltalia Energia do Brasil Ltda. and Voltalia S/A argue, in summary, the regularity of the environmental licensing process, stating that adequate technical studies were carried out, including an assessment of environmental and climatic impacts, and that there was no omission regarding the analysis of related risks. They also allege that the action does not reflect the position of the majority of the population of Serra do Mel and that any successful outcome of the lawsuit could generate negative impacts on the economy of producers and workers in the region. They argue that the project, being a renewable energy source, contributes to the energy transition, to the mitigation of climate change, and to the promotion of climate justice, being aligned with national and international environmental and climate public policies, with particular concern regarding climate emergencies. In this context, PC-32/2025 of the IACHR is invoked as an interpretative parameter regarding environmental protection and addressing the climate emergency, highlighting the need for harmonization between economic development and environmental protection, as well as the decisive contribution of the project to the consolidation of a clean energy matrix in Rio Grande do Norte and Brazil. Finally, Defendants argue that there is no concrete environmental damage or imminent risk that justifies the suspension of the project. The dismissal of the action in its entirety is requested, with the revocation of any granted injunction and the recognition of the validity of the challenged administrative acts.

Geography

Rio Grande do Norte

Recent cases