With just six months until it hosts the 30th UN Climate Change Conference (COP30), Brazil is facing intense domestic and international criticism for pushing Bill 2159/2021, which significantly weakens its environmental licensing system. Critics argue that this bill will facilitate large-scale infrastructure projects, such as Amazon oil exploration and the paving of the BR-319 highway, potentially threatening even the best-preserved areas of the Amazon rainforest. Experts claim several provisions of the bill violate the Brazilian Constitution, and both environmental organizations and the Ministry of Environment are strongly opposing it.

Key Changes in Environmental Licensing: The Spread of 'Self-Licensing'

Currently, Brazil's environmental licensing system mandates that all businesses using natural resources or potentially harming the environment or local communities must obtain an environmental license. Project proponents are required to conduct studies assessing potential impacts and proposing mitigation measures. Environmental specialists from federal, state, or municipal governments then approve these studies and monitor compliance. While this process has often been criticized for its slow pace, it has been regarded as the only tool for preventing environmental disasters.

However, the new bill fundamentally changes these procedures. Notably, it introduces a significantly streamlined process called 'License by Adhesion and Commitment (LAC)' for small and medium-sized businesses. This 'self-licensing' mechanism allows businesses to proceed automatically with their projects by filling out an online form stating that their project does not violate environmental regulations. According to Ana Carolina Crisostomo, an environmental specialist at WWF-Brazil, approximately 80% of projects currently applying for licenses in Brazil would fall under the LAC system. Critics argue that this effectively signals the end of the environmental licensing system.

Wallace Lopes, Deputy Director of ASCEMA (Association of Federal Environmental Specialists), highlighted the flaws of this self-licensing approach, stating, "It's only a 'license' in name; if the entrepreneur does everything themselves, the state doesn't need to approve it." He cited the Brumadinho dam collapse in Minas Gerais, Brazil, as an example of his concerns. The 2019 accident killed over 270 people and polluted the Paraopeba River. Even though this dam underwent strict environmental licensing, the accident occurred due to insufficient inspection and lack of compliance. Crisostomo warned, "If such accidents can occur under the current licensing system, half of the preventive and remedial measures wouldn't even be planned if approved under a simplified procedure."

Special Licensing for 'Strategic Projects': Amazon Oil Exploration and Large-Scale Infrastructure Development

The bill has generated even greater controversy by proposing a 'special environmental license' for projects deemed 'strategic' by the federal government. This special license could be approved in a single stage within a year, meaning it could bypass in-depth review processes for environmental impact assessments and mitigation measures. The decision on what constitutes 'strategic' would be made by a political committee, raising concerns that environmental protection could be sidelined by political influence.

This measure is expected to directly impact sensitive projects like oil exploration in the Amazon River estuary. Brazil's state-owned oil company, Petrobras, has pressured IBAMA, the environmental agency, to obtain exploration permits in the Amazon River estuary and has now secured approval for a key necessary step. Environmental experts warn that oil exploration in this region carries a high risk of oil spills, which could reach up to eight countries, the Amazon's vast coral reef system, and the world's largest mangrove forests if an accident occurs.

This special environmental license provision, proposed at the last minute by Senate President Davi Alcolumbre, is interpreted as specifically targeting the Petrobras project in his home state of Amapá. Lopes of ASCEMA stated, "It is clear that this amendment was tailor-made because of the controversy surrounding the oil well in the Amazon River basin." He expressed concern that various large-scale projects, including hydroelectric plants, major roads, and mining complexes, could receive special licenses under the guise of being 'strategic.'

President Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva also has a long-standing affinity for large-scale infrastructure projects. The Belo Monte hydroelectric plant, initiated during his second term (2007-10) and completed during Dilma Rousseff's presidency, diverted the flow of the Xingu River, displaced tens of thousands of people, and killed over 85,000 fish. Crisostomo noted, "There is a very old vision of development within the federal government, and the president expresses it very much."

Furthermore, the Ferrogrão railway project, which would connect Brazil's grain belt to the Tapajós River, could also be subject to this special license. According to the Climate Policy Initiative, this project could cause deforestation of up to 2,000 square kilometers (772 square miles).

Similarly, the BR-319 highway paving project, connecting Porto Velho and Manaus, the capitals of Rondônia and Amazonas states, respectively, could also benefit from this bill. The bill includes new provisions facilitating licensing for improvement works on existing projects. While this road was opened in the 1970s, a 400 km (250 miles) unpaved section is impassable for most of the year. However, studies show that paving this section with asphalt would quadruple deforestation rates along the road in one of the Amazon's best-preserved areas. Forty conservation units and fifty indigenous territories would be affected, potentially even isolated indigenous groups. Lopes lamented, "This bill created self-licensing for small and medium-sized businesses and special licensing for large corporations, so there's nothing left now."

Disregard for Traditional Communities and Worsening Environmental Destruction Concerns

The bill exempts projects from considering their impact on hundreds of indigenous and Quilombola (descendants of runaway slaves) communities that have not yet been fully demarcated by the federal government. According to the Socio-Environmental Institute (ISA), a Brazilian NGO advocating for indigenous rights, 259 indigenous lands (32.6% of the total territory) and 1,553 Quilombola communities (80%) would be excluded from impact assessments. The ISA stated in a technical report that "they will be considered non-existent for environmental licensing, impact assessments, and the requirements of conditions to prevent, mitigate or compensate for socio-environmental impacts." The ISA also noted that Brazil's protected areas would be disregarded in the licensing process unless the venture facility is directly located within a protected area.

The bill also exempts agriculture and livestock farming from environmental licensing. Ranchers would still need deforestation permits but would not need to submit studies on how much water they draw from waterways, where they dispose of waste, or how much timber they extract from the area. Crisostomo warned, "There are strong indications that deforestation will increase significantly."

Strong Opposition from the Ministry of Environment and Civil Society

Brazil's Ministry of Environment stated in an official announcement that the bill "represents a significant dismantling of existing rules and poses a risk to the country's environmental and social security," criticizing it for being "silent on the climate crisis." Marina Silva, Minister of Environment and Climate Change, after being attacked by lawmakers in a Senate committee on May 27, emphasized, "Environmental licensing is an achievement of Brazilian society, and only the Brazilian people can stop the proposed dismantling."

The Climate Observatory, a civil society coalition, warned in an open letter that "the approval of this bill will severely undermine the country's environmental credibility and could prevent the achievement of greenhouse gas reduction targets under the Paris Agreement." Fiocruz, Brazil's leading federal health research center, also released a technical report stating that the bill "relativizes the responsibilities of business operators and weakens the state's capacity to protect life, public health, and ecosystems."

Bill Supporters' Claims and Experts' Rebuttals

Supporters of the bill argue that it will provide legal certainty for Brazilian entrepreneurs and reduce bureaucracy. During debates, senators supported the proposals despite expert warnings, claiming the bill does not change environmental protection laws but merely speeds up licensing, thus not harming nature. Senator Tereza Cristina, the bill's rapporteur and a leader of the agricultural lobby group, told CNN Brazil, "Some things can be licensed much faster. We don't have the personnel to analyze every proposal in a notary-like manner." Cristina served as Agriculture Minister during former President Jair Bolsonaro's term and pursued policies to weaken environmental protection.

However, experts point out that the bill could actually increase legal uncertainty. Since each state or municipality would decide the project's impact and the type of licensing to follow, rules would proliferate instead of being standardized. WWF's Crisostomo asked, "How can you have legal certainty if, instead of standardization, rules multiply? It will lead to much litigation."

Lopes of ASCEMA emphasized that the true solution to speeding up environmental licensing is to increase the staff of environmental agencies. He added, "The reality is that there is no one to do the work. And that's what this bill doesn't address."

Future Outlook: Possibility of Supreme Court Litigation

Congressman Nilto Tatto and non-governmental organizations admit that the bill is unlikely to be overturned in the House of Representatives. If the bill is approved, President Lula might veto some provisions, but Congress is likely to override him. The last resort would be to challenge the bill's constitutionality before the Brazilian Supreme Court. Congressman Tatto stated, "It will go to litigation because it is a clear affront to the Constitution itself."

If Brazil, the host of COP30, passes this bill, it will inevitably face international criticism and a loss of credibility regarding its climate change efforts. As the country that holds the Amazon, the world's attention is focused on whether Brazil can find a balance between environmental protection and economic development.

[Copyright (c) Global Economic Times. All Rights Reserved.]