STF judges time frame, licensing and Soy Moratorium in August

The letter to the STF is the result of a meeting that brought together indigenous legal professionals from all regions of the country in Brasília between July 21st and 23rd, explains Miriam Leitão in O Globo. For the National Indigenous Advocacy Network and the Articulation of Indigenous Peoples of Brazil (APIB), decisions that may impact Indigenous Territories require public debate, transparency and participation of affected peoples. This will only be achieved with the trial in a physical plenary session, broadcast free to air on TV Justiça and the Court's official social networks.

Although the STF has already declared the thesis of the time frame unconstitutional, the letter warns of the creation of new administrative and legal obstacles that could paralyze the demarcations of Indigenous Lands (TIs), highlights Combate Environmental Racism. Among the points of greatest concern are the rules on prior compensation for bare land, the permanence of non-indigenous occupants in already identified territories and the attempt to criminalize indigenous repossessions, which are legitimate responses to the State's omission.

The fact that the STF is returning to judge a thesis already considered unconstitutional by the Court itself is questioned by Emanuelli Carvalho dos Santos, a lawyer and criminologist who works in Human Rights, socio-environmental reparation and governance of collective conflicts. "In the end, when a people needs to win the same constitutional battle over and over again, the problem is no longer in the interpretation of the Constitution. It is in the resistance to complying with it", he highlights in Migalhas.

The Court's “Green Agenda” in August also includes the judgment of actions that challenge provisions of the General Environmental Licensing Law and the Special Environmental License (LAE), approved by the National Congress in 2025. The new licensing is the target of criticism from environmental organizations, such as the Climate Observatory, and political parties such as the PSOL, details below.

The magnitude of the judgment is reflected in the history of the matter itself. Brasil de Fato recalls that the General Environmental Licensing Law was processed for 21 years in the National Congress before its approval. The level of friction between the powers was evident when, after the text was sanctioned by President Lula with 63 vetoes, the Legislature overturned 56 of them, reestablishing central points of flexibility. In the Senate, the basic project was promoted by an impressive score of 54 votes in favor and 13 against, illustrating the strong pressure from productive sectors to facilitate infrastructure works and agribusiness projects.

The STF must also judge actions related to the Soy Moratorium. The lawsuits challenge laws approved by Mato Grosso, Rondônia, Maranhão and Tocantins that remove tax incentives from companies participating in the private agreement that restricts the purchase of soy produced in deforested areas of the Amazon after 2008, reports Tribuna da Bahia.