Case Name: ADPF 749 (Revocation of CONAMA Resolutions)

Summary

This is a Claim of Non-Compliance with a Fundamental Precept (ADPF) filed by the political party Rede Sustentabilidade (Rede) to challenge CONAMA Resolution 500/2020, which revoked CONAMA Resolutions 284/2001, 302/2002 and 303/2002 – which regulated the licensing of irrigation activities and definitions of permanent preservation areas (APPs) in artificial reservoirs, mangroves and coastal vegetation – as well as the new CONAMA Resolution 499/2020, which altered the licensing of waste processing activities in rotary kilns, revoking CONAMA Resolution 264/1999. Regarding the revoked Resolutions, the plaintiff argues that (i) the authorization of pesticide burning, (ii) the reduction of the permanent preservation area, and (iii) the modification of the environmental licensing process for irrigation and burning of toxic waste are measures that go against environmental protection efforts. It claims there is a violation of the fundamental right to an ecologically balanced environment, given the regression in regulations that established greater control and oversight of activities with potential for environmental degradation or potential for increased waste of natural resources. No regulation aimed at the same environmental protection goals has been presented to replace the revoked regulations, evidencing socio-environmental regression, with consequences that the plaintiff claims will be felt by current and future generations regarding water, climate, and pollution issues in a systemic way. The initial complaint also specifically points out the effects of climate change. In questioning the revocation of Resolution 303/2002, which deals with the protection of mangroves and coastal dunes in Brazil as Permanent Preservation Areas (APPs), it highlights its consequences for climate change. The text argues that coastal dune and mangrove areas contribute directly and indirectly to atmospheric carbon sequestration, which is important for mitigating climate change, and help reduce the vulnerability of coastal zones, which are the areas most affected by these changes, demonstrating their importance for adaptation. It emphasizes that maintaining legal protection for these areas is essential to enable, among other benefits, the achievement of the goals of the Paris Agreement (promulgated by Federal Decree 9.073/2017). Furthermore, it reinforces the importance of CONAMA Resolution 303/2002, due to the special protection afforded to the Atlantic Forest, particularly with regard to coastal dune vegetation. Finally, discussions regarding CONAMA Resolution 499/2020 also mention greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions resulting from waste incineration. Therefore, it is requested, as a preliminary measure, the suspension of the effects of (i) CONAMA Resolution 500/2020, with the reinstatement of Resolutions 284/2001, 302/2002, and 303/2002, and (ii) the new CONAMA Resolution 499/2020, which revokes and replaces Resolution 264/1999. Ultimately, it is requested that the Resolutions be declared unconstitutional. The Reporting Justice Rosa Weber ordered the joint processing of this ADPF with ADPFs 747 and 748, which also question the constitutionality of CONAMA Resolutions 499/2020 and 500/2020, due to the similarity of their subject matter. There was a single-judge decision, later confirmed by the Plenary of the Supreme Federal Court, partially granting the preliminary injunction requests to suspend, until the judgment on the merits of the action, the effects of CONAMA Resolution 500/2020, with the immediate restoration of the validity and effectiveness of CONAMA Resolutions 284/2001, 302/2002 and 303/2002, but the request to suspend the effectiveness of CONAMA Resolution 499/2020 was denied. The climate issue was not addressed in the decision. Subsequently, there was a final decision that confirmed the preliminary ruling and declared CONAMA Resolution 500/2020 unconstitutional, ordering the immediate restoration of the validity and effectiveness of CONAMA Resolutions 284/2001, 302/2002 and 303/2002. It was understood that the mere revocation of regulations necessary for compliance with environmental legislation, without their replacement or updating, compromises the observance of the Federal Constitution, current legislation, and international commitments. The judgment on the preliminary injunction regarding CONAMA Resolution 499/2020 was also confirmed, rejecting the request regarding its unconstitutionality based on the understanding that the new regulatory parameters established would be compatible with the constitutional text. After the final judgment, the action is definitively closed.

See more See less

Main norms mobilized

• Article 170 of the Federal Constitution (CRFB/88)
• Article 225 of the Federal Constitution (CRFB/88)
• Article 5th of the Federal Constitution (CRFB/88)
• Atlantic Forest Law (Federal Law 11.428/2006)
• Federal Constitution (CRFB/88)
• Forest Code (Federal Law 12.651/2012)
• National Environment Policy Act - PNMA (Federal Law 6.938/1981)
• National System of Conservation Units Law - SNUC (Federal Law 9.985/2000)
• National Water Resources Policy (Federal Law 9.433/1997)
• Paris Agreement (Federal Decree 9.073/2017)

Case timeline

Case documents