AM Brazil
The organization Observatório do Clima filed a Public Civil Action against the Ministry of the Environment (MMA) and the Federal Union, seeking to compel the Brazilian government to update its National Climate Change Plan (Plano Nacional sobre Mudança do Clima or Plano Clima). The central argument was that the current plan, developed in 2008, was outdated in light of Law 12.187/2009 (PNMC), the National Environmental Policy, the Paris Agreement, and recent scientific evidence presented by the IPCC in the AR6 report.
The organization argues that the lack of an updated Climate Plan constitutes a state omission, as the instrument does not reflect regulatory advances, international commitments undertaken by Brazil, or the growing climate urgency. It points out that the country is one of the largest emitters of greenhouse gases, primarily due to increased deforestation, especially in the Amazon. It also cites environmental setbacks under the current government in various areas, weakening the state's capacity to reduce emissions.
As a line of argument, the plaintiffs cite eight international precedents in climate litigation, highlighting the role of the judiciary in addressing the climate crisis. They thus demand that the Ministry of the Environment and the European Union be ordered to present an updated, technically robust plan, consistent with the 1.5°C global warming limit and developed with effective public participation.
The Union argued that lis pendens existed in relation to Popular Action 5008035-37.2021.4.03.6100, which addresses the "climate pedaling" and the Brazilian NDC. It maintained that the NDC constitutes the Climate Plan itself and that there was no government omission, highlighting Brazil's adherence to the Paris Agreement and the issuance of Decree 9.578/2018. It asserted the absence of illegality in the state's actions and requested the dismissal of the case or, alternatively, the recognition of a connection between the actions.
The Climate Observatory, in response, denied the existence of lis pendens or connection, pointing out that the objects and grounds are different: this ACP focuses on the updating of the Climate Plan in accordance with the PNMC, while the popular action deals with international commitments (NDC).
The court rejected the preliminary proceedings, understanding that the actions had different claims and regulatory frameworks and that there was autonomy between the domestic and international spheres of climate policy. The Union filed an appeal against this decision.
Subsequently, both parties requested the consensual suspension of the process for six months to allow the preparation of the new Climate Plan, which was approved by the court.
The central climate arguments put forward by the Observatório do Clima (Climate Observatory) are based on the scientific urgency demonstrated by the IPCC in its Sixth Assessment Report (AR6), which warns of the rapid worsening of global warming and the need for profound and immediate reductions in greenhouse gases (GHG). According to the organization, Brazil—due to its size, ecological importance, and level of emissions associated with deforestation—has a strategic role in stabilizing the global climate, which imposes enhanced obligations on the Brazilian state regarding climate planning.
The lawsuit argued that the lack of updates to the National Climate Change Plan (PNMC), originally drafted in 2008, constitutes a serious omission and violates the constitutional duty of environmental protection stipulated in Article 225 of the Constitution. It maintains that an outdated plan cannot effectively guide public policies on mitigation and adaptation, thus violating fundamental rights, international commitments, and the National Climate Change Policy itself (Law 12.187/2009).
The action also highlighted that Brazilian emissions have increased, especially due to the rise in deforestation in the Amazon, which compromises natural carbon sinks and accelerates dangerous climate cycles. According to the organization, the lack of coordinated government action directly impacts Brazil's contribution to global warming and the likelihood that the country will fail to meet the goals of the Paris Agreement.
The Climate Observatory indicated that updating the Climate Plan is essential to: (i) establish clear and scientifically consistent goals; (ii) guide sectoral mitigation policies (energy, transport, land use); (iii) define mechanisms for social participation, essential for the legitimacy of climate policies; and (iv) coordinate instruments provided for in the PNMC, such as the Climate Fund and sectoral plans.
Furthermore, the organization argued that recent environmental setbacks and institutional weakenings increase the country's climate vulnerability, reinforcing the need for judicial intervention to overcome state inaction.
In the interlocutory decision, the court recognized the relevance of the PNMC as an autonomous internal regulatory framework with respect to the international NDC, highlighting that the Brazilian State can—and should—adopt more rigorous internal regulations to fulfill its constitutional duty to protect the climate, which legitimizes the demand for updating the plan
- Climate Observatory
- Federal Union
- Ministry of Environment
The action does not seek to protect a specific physical territory, but rather the entire Brazilian national territory, insofar as it aims to ensure the updating of the Climate Plan, a fundamental instrument for guiding public policies on mitigation and adaptation throughout the country. It is, therefore, a demand of national and systemic scope, whose objective is to guarantee the protection of the climate, ecosystems, and the populations that depend on them.
Although the action does not define a specific region, it highlights the critical importance of strategic biomes, especially the Amazon, as the country's main carbon sink and the region that accounts for the majority of Brazilian emissions resulting from deforestation and land-use change. The deterioration of this territory directly affects national and international climate stability.
The communities potentially benefiting from this action include: Indigenous peoples, whose ways of life are intrinsically linked to the integrity of ecosystems and who are disproportionately affected by extreme weather events; traditional communities (riverbank communities, quilombola communities, extractive communities), dependent on natural resources and especially vulnerable to deforestation, droughts, fires, and hydrological disruptions; urban and rural populations exposed to heat waves, floods, water crises, and loss of agricultural productivity; and present and future generations, in line with the principle of intergenerational equity recognized by Brazilian climate policy.
Thus, the action aims to protect the climate as a diffuse good and, by extension, the entire national territory and its various communities, whose environmental security depends on an updated, robust and science-based climate plan.
International agreements/treaties
- Paris Agreement
- ILO Convention 169
National laws
- Federal Constitution of 1988
- Law 6.938/1981 – National Environmental Policy (PNMA)
- Law 12,187/2009 – National Policy on Climate Change (PNMC)
- Law 12,651/2012 – Forest Code
- Decree 9.073/2017
- Decree 9.578/2018
- Decree 7.390/2010
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 .