Key Brazilian Mining Case Advances

The Instituto Cordilheira recently filed an appeal to push for justice in Minas Gerais, Brazil, a territory riddled with a history of mining company abuses. Instituto Cordilheira has collaborated with ELAW, Conterra, Instituto Fórum Permanente São Francisco, and the Loucos Por Bento group to advance an important case to ensure that mining expansion in the region complies with environmental and human rights laws and considers climate impacts.

Since last year, ELAW has been providing technical support to help the court understand what is at stake as it considers the Samarco Long Term Project’s expansion plans– outlining the potential issues with planned iron ore mining activities, new tailings storage structures, and the climate risks associated with allowing this project to continue and expand its operations.

Partners at Instituto Cordilheira secured an injunction in December with strong implications for requirements to consider the climate risks, “a factor that has become central to any long-term mining project”, according to the judge.

Danilo Chammas, a human rights lawyer at Instituto Cordilheira, says that “This was the first time that an injunction has been granted for a project in Minas Gerais that recognizes the risks posed by extreme weather events and sets a requirement for the project proponents to conduct climate studies. This decision upheld the recognition of the need to adapt the project and ordered mining company Samarco to suspend installation work on the project.”

Letícia Aleixo, ELAW Attorney, points out some key points of the court’s initial decision.

“The judge found the Environmental Impact Assessment to be deficient because it failed to adequately consider Brazil’s constitutional and international commitments, particularly those relating to climate protection and addressing climate change impacts. The court ordered the State of Minas Gerais to require Samarco to conduct additional studies “incorporating risk, vulnerability, and climate adaptation analyses,” covering “(i) Hydrological and Geotechnical Modeling that integrates extreme weather event scenarios”; “and not just historical data, for the projected period of operation and post-closure of the structures”; “(ii) Inventory and Assessment of Greenhouse Gas (GHG) Emissions, and measurement of the project’s impact on national and international mitigation targets”; and “(iii) Adaptation Measures that demonstrate the resilience of the . . . structures in the face of future climate risks.” 

The proposed location of the project has already suffered the biggest socio-environmental crime in Brazil, the Mariana Dam Collapse, and has not yet had full reparations. The following excerpt from the court decision is also noteworthy:

“It should also be emphasized that the plaintiffs…members of communities that to this day experience the social, economic, environmental, and psychological effects of the greatest socio-environmental tragedy in the country’s history, have unequivocal legitimacy and legal interest. This is not, therefore, an abstract action or one dissociated from factual reality, but rather the concrete exercise of citizenship by those who have endured—and continue to endure—the consequences of a model of mineral exploitation that has seriously failed in the past. It is legitimate, from a constitutional perspective, for these citizens to question the granting of a broad environmental license even before the damage resulting from the previous disaster has been fully repaired, especially when the new venture is being developed in the same region and under conditions that pose extreme risks inherent to mining activity itself.”

An interim ruling by the Tribunal Regional Federal da 6a. Região (Court of Appeal) confirmed the need for studies on climate risks, but authorized Samarco to resume work on the project, compelling Instituto Cordilheira to file the recent appeal.

Danilo Chammas from Instituto Cordilheira writes that “ELAW’s technical support has been critical to this ongoing case. One of ELAW’s analyses was cited by the representative of the Federal Public Prosecutor’s Office when preparing his opinion, which reinforced the plaintiffs’ requests.”

ELAW has been glad to contribute legal, scientific, and economic expertise to this important case. We eagerly await the court’s decision and will keep you informed as the case progresses.

Dr. Letícia Aleixo
Attorney
Environmental Law Alliance Worldwide

Learn more: 

Decision. Mônica dos Santos and Mauro Marcos da Silva vs. Samarco Mineração S.A., Minas Gerais State and Agência Nacional de Mineração – ANM (mining expansion at the Germano Complex)

Photo 2: Members of the “Loucos por Bento” Collective, Mauro Marcos da Silva and Mônica dos Santos, in Bento Rodrigues. November 2025. PHOTO: Carolina de Moura, Instituto Cordilheira