Case Name: ADI 7146 (APP protection regime in urban areas)

Summary

This is a Direct Action of Unconstitutionality (ADI), with a request for a precautionary measure, filed by four political parties. It seeks a declaration of unconstitutionality of Federal Law 14.285/2021, which was approved by the National Congress and sanctioned by the President of the Republic. The law alters the environmental protection regime of urban Permanent Preservation Areas (APPs), granting municipalities and the Federal District the power to define the limits of APPs around watercourses in urban areas, regardless of the limits established by Federal Law 12.651/2012 (Forest Code). The authors argue that the challenged law is materially unconstitutional because it violates (i) the constitutional regime for the distribution of powers in environmental matters (articles 24, VI, VII and VIII in conjunction with 30, item II), (ii) the fundamental right to an ecologically balanced environment (article 225), and (iii) the duty of the public authorities to protect the environment (articles 225 and 23, VI and VII), as provided for in the Federal Constitution, as well as the principles of prevention and precaution, the prohibition of regression in environmental matters, and the prohibition of insufficient protection. They believe that the law represents a weakening of the protection of urban APPs (Permanent Preservation Areas), which, in turn, impacts the management of environmental risks and disasters (such as floods and landslides), which are increasingly frequent with the intensification of extreme events associated with climate change. They request, as a precautionary measure, the suspension of the effects of Federal Law 14.285/2021 until the final judgment of the action, maintaining the applicability of the previous law. On the merits, they request a declaration of unconstitutionality of the law. Alternatively, they request the unconstitutionality of the challenged interpretation, without textual reduction, attributing a reading in accordance with the Federal Constitution so that the law is interpreted in a way that prevents the reduction of the minimum protection level previously established for urban APPs, that is, aiming at the application of the minimum protection zones established by the Forest Code.

In a single-judge decision, it was determined that an abbreviated procedure should be adopted, taking into consideration the regulatory context and the relevance of the matter, so that the analysis of the controversy can be carried out definitively.

The Socialism and Liberty Party (PSOL) issued a statement reiterating the urgency of considering the precautionary measure, emphasizing that several municipalities are already enacting laws that weaken the protection of Permanent Preservation Areas (APPs). This situation highlights the need for a swift and decisive analysis of the issue, since the new municipal legislation could further compromise environmental integrity and the safety of urban areas in the face of natural disasters.

See more See less

Main norms mobilized

• Article 225 of the Federal Constitution (CRFB/88)
• Complementary Law 140/2011
• Federal Constitution (CRFB/88)
• Forest Code (Federal Law 12.651/2012)

Case timeline

Case documents