DF Brazil
This is a Direct Action of Unconstitutionality (ADI) with a request for precautionary measures filed by the Communist Party of Brazil, Rede Sustentabilidade (REDE), the Green Party, and the Socialism and Liberty Party (PSOL), seeking to have Articles 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, and 6 of Law 12.709/2024 of the state of Mato Grosso declared unconstitutional. This law, which came into effect on January 1, 2025, aims to end the sectoral agreement known as the "Soybean Moratorium," one of the most successful programs for reconciling large-scale agricultural production with environmental sustainability.
The agreement regulates the granting of tax incentives, as well as the concession of public lands, to companies in the agribusiness sector that have internal purchasing policies that seek to avoid the acquisition of agricultural products (soybeans, corn, livestock, etc.) produced in recently deforested areas.
The petitioners argue that this is an initiative solely of the head of the Executive Branch and assert that the new law, by revoking these incentives, penalizes legal entities that adopt sustainable purchasing policies and do not promote the destruction of the Amazon rainforest. They maintain that such a measure would violate the principles of equality and free enterprise enshrined in the Federal Constitution. Furthermore, they emphasize that this law infringes upon acquired rights, legally valid acts, the defense of the environment as a fundamental principle of the national tax system, the right to an ecologically balanced environment, the duty to protect the environment, and the principle of non-regression in environmental protection.
It is emphasized that the law represents a setback in the fight against climate change, considering the commitments made in the Declaration of the United Nations Conference on the Human Environment, the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change, the Kyoto Protocol, and the Paris Agreement. In a preliminary injunction, a request was made to suspend the effects of the aforementioned articles of Law 12.709/2024 of the State of Mato Grosso. In the final ruling of the Direct Action of Unconstitutionality (ADI), Law 12.709/2024 was declared unconstitutional.
In a preliminary decision, the Judge Rapporteur considered that the legal plausibility of the request for urgent precautionary measure had to be demonstrated and granted the precautionary measure to suspend the effectiveness of Law 12.709/2024.
The Governor of the State of Mato Grosso, the Legislative Assembly of the State of Mato Grosso and the National Confederation of Agriculture and Livestock of Brazil (CNA) filed requests for reconsideration of the preliminary precautionary measure granted and for total dismissal of the action, based, among other reasons, on the protection of the state economy, federal autonomy and national sovereignty.
The presiding judge partially reconsidered the injunction to reinstate the effects of Article 2 of Law 12.709/2024 of the State of Mato Grosso as of January 1, 2026, maintained the suspension of the other previously challenged legal provisions, and referred the case to the full court. The court, by majority vote, upheld the injunction, maintaining, in accordance with the presiding judge, the effectiveness only of Article 2 of the challenged law.
In a decision on the request for incidental precautionary measures, the presiding magistrate expressed his support for the suspension of actions that discuss the constitutionality and/or legality of the Soybean Moratorium in ordinary jurisdictional and administrative instances, such as ADI 7775, 7823 and 7863, until the Federal Supreme Court issues a final ruling on the matter.
The Court, by majority vote, ratified the precautionary measure granted, maintaining, according to the presiding magistrate, the effectiveness only of article 2 of the challenged Law.
Implementation
The Court argued that the Law represented a setback in the fight against climate change, partially granting the injunction to reinstate the effects of Article 2 of Law 12.709/2024 of the State of Mato Grosso as of January 1, 2026, but maintaining the suspension of the other previously challenged legal provisions and referring the case to the full court. The Court, by majority vote, upheld the injunction, maintaining, in accordance with the presiding judge, the effectiveness only of Article 2 of the challenged Law.
In the ADI (Agreement on Climate Change), the plaintiff parties argue that the law violates the climate obligations assumed by Brazil at the constitutional and international levels. The plaintiffs emphasize that the Paris Agreement, incorporated into domestic law, imposes on the Brazilian State the duty to “promote active measures to reduce GHG emissions” and to orient the energy system toward low-emission sources.
They argue that the law causes environmental setbacks with climate impacts associated with land use and deforestation, and they challenge its constitutionality because it eliminates incentives, penalizes legal entities that adopt sustainable purchasing policies, and does not promote the destruction of the Amazon rainforest. They maintain that this measure violates the principles of equality and free enterprise enshrined in the Federal Constitution. Furthermore, they emphasize that this law infringes upon acquired rights, legally valid acts, the defense of the environment as a fundamental principle of the national tax system, the right to an ecologically balanced environment, the duty to protect the environment, and the principle of non-regression in environmental protection.
- Communist Party of Brazil (PCdoB)
- Sustainability Network (REDE)
- Green Party
- Socialism and Libertad Party (PSOL)
- Governor of the State of Mato Grosso
- State bodies
Mato Grosso is the third largest state in Brazil, with a land area of approximately 903,357 km², located in the central-western region. It stands out as an agricultural powerhouse and for being home to three main ecosystems: the Amazon rainforest, the Cerrado, and the Pantanal.
It is located in the Central-West region of Brazil and is one of the country's largest states. Its territory encompasses a strategic transition zone between three major biomes: the Amazon (north), the Cerrado (center), and the Pantanal (southwest).
This condition makes it a territory of extremely high biodiversity and, at the same time, a critical zone of pressure from land-use change, especially from agribusiness (soybeans, cattle ranching). It is highly sensitive to climate variability (phenomena such as El Niño), increases in average temperatures, and changes in precipitation patterns. The state is an epicenter of environmental conflicts due to accelerated deforestation, particularly in the Amazonian agricultural frontier, the fragmentation of ecosystems that affect biological corridors between biomes, recurrent forest fires intensified by droughts and agricultural practices, and pressure on water resources, both from pollution and overexploitation. The Pantanal, for example, depends on delicate hydrological cycles that are being altered by changes in land use upstream.
In summary, Mato Grosso represents a territory of high environmental priority where climate vulnerability, economic pressure and global ecological relevance converge, making it a central focus for environmental legal action.
International agreements/treaties
- Paris Agreement (Federal Decree 9.073/2017)
- United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change - UNFCCC (Federal Decree 2.652/1998)
- Declaration of the United Nations Conference on the Human Environment
- Kyoto Protocol (Federal Decree 5.445/2005)
National laws
- Article 170 of the Constitution of the Federative Republic of Brazil of 1988 (CRFB/88)
- Article 225 of the Constitution of the Federative Republic of Brazil of 1988 (CRFB/88)
- Article 5 of the Constitution of the Federative Republic of Brazil of 1988 (CRFB/88)
- Forestry Code (Federal Law 12.651/2012)
- State Constitution
Beginning
- Principle of prevention
- Principle of Progressivity and Non-Regression
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 .