Case Name: Instituto Arayara vs. ANP e União Federal (1st cycle of permanent oil concession offering in the Santos and Campos basins)

Summary

This is a Public Civil Action (ACP) on climate issues with a request for urgent relief filed by the Arayara International Institute of Education and Culture against the National Agency of Petroleum, Natural Gas and Biofuels (ANP) and the Federal Government. The action seeks to challenge the auction of exploratory oil blocks conducted through the 1st Cycle of the Permanent Offer under the Production Sharing Regime. It argues that the inclusion of blocks located in the Santos Basin and the Campos Basin in the auction is invalid because they overlap and are close to Priority Areas for Biodiversity Conservation and Conservation Units. It is argued that the climate crisis scenario demands an energy transition to clean energy and a reduction in carbon dioxide emissions, which is incompatible with the expansion of oil exploration over protected areas. The administrative act issued jointly by the Ministry of Mines and Energy and the Ministry of the Environment and Climate Change that authorized the offering of the aforementioned blocks is also challenged. The following is requested as a preliminary measure: (i) the suspension of the offering of the aforementioned blocks; (ii) the presentation of an inventory of greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions that will be generated by the commercial exploitation of the blocks offered in the auction; (iii) the presentation by the defendants of in-depth studies on the socio-environmental and economic impacts resulting from the expansion of E&P; activity in the Santos and Campos Basins. As a final measure, confirmation of the preliminary injunction is requested, and further requests that the defendants refrain from conducting new bidding rounds for the aforementioned blocks/areas without unequivocally demonstrating technical and environmental compliance, especially with substantiated opinions from bodies such as ICMBio, IBAMA, and state/municipal environmental agencies.

ANP (National Agency of Petroleum, Natural Gas and Biofuels) submitted a preliminary statement regarding the request for urgent relief, arguing that the initial petition was flawed because it failed to indicate the cause of action. It also alleged the need to observe the decision of the Supreme Federal Court (STF) ADPF 825 and that environmental studies should be the subject of future licensing of blocks acquired at auction, including the analysis of issues related to fauna, climate, and mitigating and compensatory measures. It affirmed the legality of holding the auction and that judicial intervention should not interfere with technical choices. Therefore, it requested the dismissal of the preliminary injunction.

In its preliminary statement, the Union argued that the plaintiff lacked standing; that the Supreme Court's decision in ADI 825 needed to be observed; that the environmental impacts resulting from the activity would be duly assessed through the subsequent environmental licensing procedure; that a public hearing would be held with the participation of those affected; and that the executive branch had discretion to decide on the best model for providing the service and for the economic exploitation of the asset in question, thus there was no reason to suspend the auction.

In its ruling, the court dismissed the action without prejudice, recognizing Arayara's lack of standing and absence of interest in bringing the action. According to the decision, Arayara failed to demonstrate thematic relevance to be considered a legitimate party in this class action, and the bidding process it seeks to prevent was already concluded on December 16, 2022.

Arayara filed a motion for clarification due to the omission in the judgment regarding requests ii and iii, but the motion was rejected due to the inadequacy of the chosen appeal route. Consequently, an appeal was filed. Arayara argued that it has standing to bring the class action lawsuit defending the diffuse right to an ecologically balanced environment and that the fact that the auction has already taken place does not preclude consideration of the requests related to the GHG emissions inventory and studies on the socio-environmental and economic impacts resulting from the expansion of E&P; activity.

In their counter-arguments to the appeal, the ANP and the Union insisted on the arguments presented in their defense documents, arguing for the upholding of the sentence.

See more See less

Main norms mobilized

• Article 170 of the Federal Constitution (CRFB/88)
• Article 225 of the Federal Constitution (CRFB/88)
• National Environment Policy Act - PNMA (Federal Law 6.938/1981)
• Paris Agreement (Federal Decree 9.073/2017)

Case timeline

Case documents