Case Name: Instituto Arayara vs Estado do Rio Grande do Sul e União Federal (Just Energy Transition in RS)

Summary

This is a Public Civil Action (ACP), with a request for urgent relief, filed by the Arayara International Institute of Education and Culture (Instituto Arayara) against the state of Rio Grande do Sul (RS) with the objective of demanding the implementation of a just energy transition in the state. The aim is to create a structured plan that foresees the effective decommissioning of the fossil fuel-fired thermoelectric sector as part of the reconstruction of the state's infrastructure. The grounds for the action include the catastrophic consequences of the climate crisis suffered by the state; the fact that its fossil fuel-fired thermoelectric sector is one of the most inefficient in Brazil and responsible for a large environmental liability and high greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions; and that the state's commitment under the Proclima 2050 program falls short of the state's needs in terms of energy transition. It is alleged that the structure of the thermoelectric sector in the state of Rio Grande do Sul contributes to climate change, and the Proclima 2050 program does not provide truly efficient guidelines for a just energy transition, which is fundamental considering the extreme weather events that have become frequent in the region. In this sense, it is argued that urgent action is needed from the states to implement mitigation plans to lessen climate change, as well as adaptation plans, considering its impacts. The plaintiff states that the Proclima 2050 program was launched by the state of Rio Grande do Sul at the end of 2023 and has as its pillars (i) climate resilience, (ii) just energy transition, (iii) reduction of GHG emissions, and (iv) environmental education and awareness. However, it is argued that, in addition to the lack of provisions for decommissioning highly emitting thermoelectric plants, the resources allocated for the execution of Proclima 2050 are insufficient in the face of the state's challenges in addressing the climate crisis. Thus, it is understood that the government of Rio Grande do Sul only used empty rhetoric about combating climate change when drafting the program, with the dismantling of environmental legislation carried out by the current state government being pointed out. On the other hand, the Arayara Institute presents the history of international climate treaties and argues that, based on the Paris Agreement, signatory states, such as Brazil, have a responsibility to adopt effective measures to reduce GHG emissions. It is further stated that the Brazilian legal system has several norms to protect the environment and the climate system, such as articles 225 and 170 of the Federal Constitution, article 251 of the Rio Grande do Sul State Constitution, the National Policy on Climate Change (PNMC), in addition to the aforementioned international climate treaties. Therefore, it is argued that Rio Grande do Sul must be compelled to take urgent measures to reduce GHG emissions and implement an energy transition. It is argued that a just transition plan should envision a low-carbon economy in which the benefits and costs of climate impacts and actions against climate change are equitably distributed among the various sectors of society, ensuring that everyone has a voice in decision-making processes. Therefore, in preliminary proceedings, it is requested that (i) the state of Rio Grande do Sul be compelled to establish a participatory committee for the development of a just energy transition plan, with a pluralistic composition; (ii) said committee operate based on scientific data, with the hiring of specialized consultants to assist in its operation; (iii) the plan formulated by the committee be presented within 180 days; and (iv) the state of Rio Grande do Sul be prevented from granting tax breaks, incentives, new licenses, and even infrastructure reconstruction works for the fossil fuel-fired thermoelectric sector. In final proceedings, it is requested that the action be granted with the confirmation of the preliminary injunction.

An injunction was granted ordering the suspension of the contract signed by the state of Rio Grande do Sul for the preparation of the Just Energy Transition Plan, until the technical committee that has been negotiated between the parties is effectively established or until some other measure is consensually adopted. Furthermore, the Union of Workers in the Mineral Extraction and Processing Industry of Candiota – the Candiota Miners' Union – was granted permission to participate as amicus curiae.

A decision was issued in the context of Appeal No. 5002577-79.2025.8.21.7000 (State of Rio Grande do Sul - TJRS) granting the request for preliminary injunction sought by the State of Rio Grande do Sul to overturn the decision that granted the provisional injunction. In this decision, the court ordered the inclusion of the Federal Government as a defendant in the lawsuit, with the case being sent to the Federal Court, based on the following grounds: i) the initial claim is based on an international law treaty and has as its cause of action the Paris Agreement, therefore, it is the function of the Federal Government to represent the country in its international relations; ii) the exceptional nature of judicial control over public management activity, requiring the observance of the separation of powers; iii) the lack of sufficient basis to determine the suspension of an administrative contract, especially since the result of this contract is a study whose outcome will benefit environmental policies and foresees eventual revision. The decision was the subject of an internal appeal and a special appeal filed by the Arayara Institute.

In view of the content of the aforementioned decision, an order/decision was issued determining the registration of the Union as the defendant in the lawsuit, as well as the referral of the case file to the Federal Court. Jurisdiction having been declined, the case was definitively closed and distributed to the Federal Court of the 9th Federal District of Porto Alegre, under number 5054037-06.2025.4.04.7100.

A judgment was rendered dismissing the case without prejudice. The court recognized the connection (identity of parties and claims) between this action, understood as a contained action, and the Public Civil Action No. 5050920-75.2023.4.04.7100 - Instituto Preservar, AGAPAN and Núcleo Amigos da Terra vs. União Federal and others (Climate emergency in the state of Rio Grande do Sul), understood as a containing action, which discusses the just energy transition regarding the coal mining sector within the State of Rio Grande do Sul. Since the containing action, whose object would be more comprehensive, has already been decided, the case was dismissed in order to avoid conflicting judgments.

The plaintiff filed an appeal, arguing a profound difference in content, scope, and purpose between the claims of both actions, thus making the application of the principle of joinder of actions inadmissible. The plaintiff requests the reversal of the appealed judgment, recognizing the absence of joinder of actions between the present class action and class action no. 5050920-75.2023.4.04.7100, and ordering the regular continuation of the proceedings.

See more See less

Main norms mobilized

• Article 170 of the Federal Constitution (CRFB/88)
• Article 225 of the Federal Constitution (CRFB/88)
• Kyoto Protocol (Federal Decree 5.445/2005)
• National Policy on Climate Change Act - PNMC (Federal Law 12.187/2009)
• Paris Agreement (Federal Decree 9.073/2017)
• State Constitution
• United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change - UNFCC (Federal Decree 2.652/1998)

Case timeline

Case documents