DF Brasília Brazil
The Arayara International Institute filed an independent action for early production of evidence against the National Agency of Petroleum, Natural Gas and Biofuels (ANP) and the Federal Union. The central objective revolved around obtaining official information to clarify the climate impact associated with the ANP's ongoing offering of blocks for oil and gas exploration. The organization maintained that greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions from fossil fuels were the main cause of global warming and that the Brazilian State should demonstrate how it calculates, monitors, and mitigates these emissions within the framework of its energy policies.
The lawsuit was based on the argument that oil expansion could jeopardize the climate goals assumed by Brazil under the Paris Agreement, which has been incorporated into domestic law with supralegal status. According to the plaintiff, the country lacks transparency regarding greenhouse gas (GHG) estimates resulting from the offering of new blocks, potential impacts on Brazil's Nationally Determined Contribution (NDC), and the accounting of emissions associated with oil exports. Therefore, the plaintiff requested a determination of whether the Federal Government: (i) conducts emissions estimates before publishing its commitments; (ii) calculates impacts on climate goals; (iii) analyzes the contribution of emissions from exported oil; (iv) has specific mitigation plans for exploration activities; and (v) considers these emissions in national energy planning.
Initially, the case was referred to another jurisdiction, but after an appeal by Arayara, the judge reconsidered and upheld the original jurisdiction. In its defense, the ANP argued that it did not formulate public policies, but only implemented them; that it was not possible to estimate emissions in advance from blocks whose oil potential was uncertain; and that the mere act of bidding did not generate emissions. The Union, for its part, responded to the questions through Information Note No. 34/2024, stating that emissions are calculated based on inventories and historical data; that emissions from exported oil are accounted for by importing countries; and that Brazil has mitigation policies and programs within the framework of the National Climate Change Policy.
After receiving the official information, the plaintiff requested the withdrawal of the lawsuit. The judge approved the withdrawal and terminated the proceedings without ruling on the merits, closing the case permanently.
In its independent action to advance the production of evidence, the Arayara International Institute focused its argument on the global climate crisis and the responsibility of the Brazilian state in expanding the supply of blocks for oil and gas exploration. The main point was that fossil fuels—oil, natural gas, and coal—were the primary source of greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions caused by human activities, thus being the determining factor in global warming.
Emissions resulting from hydrocarbon exploration and production have been described as incompatible with Brazil's climate commitments, especially its Nationally Determined Contribution (NDC) under the Paris Agreement, an international instrument with supralegal status in the Brazilian legal system. The constant offering of new blocks, without prior calculation or monitoring of potential emissions, could jeopardize the country's ability to meet its reduction targets.
The lawsuit also argued that the national energy policy, by legal mandate, should promote environmental protection, energy security, and the mitigation of greenhouse gas emissions, which would be contradicted by a strategy prioritizing oil expansion without considering its climate impacts. According to the lawsuit, the Brazilian government has not demonstrated how opening new oil blocks will affect the country's carbon budget, nor how the eventual burning of extracted oil—even abroad—will influence the global climate balance.
Another key argument was the lack of transparency: the government would not publish emissions estimates for each bid, nor the accumulated climate risks, nor the existence of a specific mitigation plan for oil activity. This omission would impede public oversight and hinder future legal actions aimed at correcting inconsistencies in energy policy.
Regarding the ruling, the Court did not analyze the substance of the climate arguments, as the action was limited to the early production of evidence. After the ANP and the Union submitted technical information (including Information Note No. 34/2024), the plaintiff requested dismissal. The judge granted this request and terminated the proceedings without ruling on the merits, failing to issue a judgment on the climate arguments or on the legality or adequacy of the State's energy and climate policies.
- Arayara International Institute (Arayara Institute for Education for Sustainability)
- Federal Union
- National Agency of Petroleum, Natural Gas and Biofuels (ANP)
In this case, there is no specific territory or defined local communities whose direct protection is the objective of the action. Unlike other climate or socio-environmental demands, this demand does not seek to protect a specific ecosystem, biome, or population.
The purpose of the action is strictly to obtain information from the Brazilian State —ANP and Federal Union— on national and global climate impacts derived from the offering of oil blocks, in order to assess whether or not the country's energy public policies comply with its climate obligations.
No mention is made of any Indigenous Land, rural community, Amazonian region, or environmentally sensitive area directly threatened by the offered blocks. Nor is any specific territory described whose physical, ecological, or cultural integrity would motivate the action. The lawsuit is justified by the need for transparency and social control over future emissions that could result from oil expansion, but not by localized impacts in a specific geographic area.
In summary:
The case does not seek to protect a specific territory or particular communities.
Its focus is on the systemic climate impact —on a national and global scale— that could result from energy policy based on fossil fuels, and not direct territorial damage.
International agreements/treaties
- Paris Agreement
- United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC)
National laws
- Federal Constitution of Brazil
- Code of Civil Procedure (CPC)
- National Climate Change Policy (PNMC) – Law 12.187/2009
- CNPE (National Energy Policy Council) Standards
- Informative Note No. 34/2024 – SNPGB / MME
- National Inventory of GHG Emissions and Removals
Beginning
- Principle of prevention
This record was created using publicly available information. If you have information about this case or would like to suggest updates or corrections, please click here .