PGR calls for reconsideration of injunction on Belo Monte~Appeal filed
STF News Tuesday, September 4, 2012
PGR calls for reconsideration of injunction on Belo Monte
The Attorney General’s Office filed an interlocutory appeal against the granting, by the regimental President of the Supreme Court, Minister Ayres Britto, an injunction to suspend the decision that determined the stoppage of activity in the construction of the Belo Monte hydroelectric plant, at para. The PGR asks that the Minister reconsider the decision, handed down on 27/8 in the complaint (RCL 14404), or submit the grievance to the plenary of the Court.
Among other arguments, the Federal Prosecutor’s Office claims that, in the region of Belo Monte hydroelectric inhabit indigenous peoples that have biological impacts, social and cultural rights recognized in environmental impact assessment (EIA). The Attorney General of the Republic, Roberto Gurgel, and the Deputy Attorney-General, Deborah Duprat, who sign the grievance, maintain that the best interpretation of article 231, paragraph 3, of the Federal Constitution, “is in the sense that the National Congress itself should promote the prior hearing of the affected indigenous communities, before authorizing the exploitation of water resources, research, and the mining of mineral wealth”. The Congressional authorization to venture without prior consultation would offend even the Convention 169 of the International Labour Organization and the decisions of the Inter-American Court of human rights.
8/27/2012- Belo Monte: Minister Ayres Britto grants the injunction requested by AGU following:
STF News Monday, August 27, 2012
Belo Monte: Minister Ayres Britto grants the injunction requested by AGU
The President of the Supreme Court, Minister Ayres Britto, granted today (27) application for injunction made by the Advocacy-Geral da União (AGU) and suspended the decision of the Federal Regional Court 1st region (TRF-1), the judge declaring embargoes, ordered the stoppage of activities in Belo Monte hydroelectric power plant, in Pará, and prevented the Instituto Brasileiro do Meio Ambiente e dos Recursos Naturais Renováveis (Ibama) practicing any licensing Act of the power plant. The Minister considered “apparent plausibility order legal” AGU in the complaint (RCL 14404), in which it was required the injunction.
In the complaint, the AGU, on behalf of the Union and of Ibama, contends that the last decision of the TRF disregarded the authority of the SUPREME COURT in the trial of the suspension Injunction (SL) 125. In it, the then President of STF, Minister Ellen Gracie (retired), authorized the Ibama to hear indigenous communities concerned, in addition to maintaining the determination to carry out environmental impact assessment (EIA) and the anthropological report in order to allow the acts necessary for the viability of the enterprise. This decision, noted the Minister Ayres Britto, “shall remain in force until the decision on the merits in the main action”.
He explained that, in SL 125, which was under discussion was the interpretation of paragraph 3 of article 231 of the Federal Constitution: If the audience of “communities” should precede the National Congress authorization for the use of water resources in indigenous lands or if, on the contrary, Parliament’s authorization is the previous step to the licensing process. Although the examination of SL 125 has not entered the merits of the case, the Minister Ellen Gracie, “in honor of the public economy and order authorized the performance of Ibama and the other bodies responsible for the continuity of the environmental licensing process of the work, nevertheless continue to exist the pending lawsuit”.
In the trial of arms embargoes Declaration, however, the TRF decided to the contrary, forbidding the Ibama to practice the administrative acts relating to licensing and invalidating those already practiced. To determine the subpoena of Ibama President “for the purposes of immediate fulfilment”, the judgment of the TRF “violated, in this provisional judgment, the authority of the decision of the Supreme Court in SL 125”, he concluded.
The injunction granted suspends the effects of the judgment of the TRF of 1st region in Embargoes in civil appeal No. 2006.39.03.000711-8, without prejudice to a more “held judgement of merit analysis when”.