Brazil’s Federal Prosecution Office has issued a recommendation to suspend REDD in Indigenous and traditional territories in Amazonas

And a stop to carbon credit trade from Indigenous lands in Amazonas.

Brazil’s REDD woes continue. In June 2024, Brazil’s Federal Police launched Operation Greenwash, which is aimed at dismantling a criminal organisation that had sold about US$34 million worth of allegedly illegal REDD credits. Earlier this month, the Federal Prosecution Office (MPF) issued a Legal Recommendation that calls for the suspension of “all ongoing operations, contracts and negotiations involving the carbon credit / REDD+ subject in the state of Amazonas, inside indigenous and traditional territories in the state”.

The Legal Recommendation also calls for the suspension of “the trade of carbon credits in Brazil or abroad coming from indigenous or traditional territories in the state of Amazonas”.

The MPF states that the suspension should remain in place until the following requirements are met:

1. Suitable and internationally recognised scientific studies should be carried out demonstrating the effectiveness of mitigating climate impacts through the use of REDD and carbon credits;

2. The rights of Indigenous Peoples and traditional communities in the state of Amazonas must be upheld in the negotiation and implementation of REDD projects;

3. A process of free, prior and informed consent must be carried out with Indigenous Peoples and traditional communities potentially affected by REDD projects, in accordance with ILO Convention 169;

4. Regulations are in place so that the above three items are implemented.

MPF adds that all of these four requirements must be met, “for negotiations on the subject to continue”.

Before MPF’s recommendations are more than ten pages of analysis about the experience of REDD since it was launched in 2007. The following is a summary of some of the key points that MPF raises.

REDD “faces many problems”

MPF writes that,

REDD, which mainly promises to reduce emissions released into the atmosphere from deforestation, faces many problems, and that deforestation and forest degradation continues to increase in the world, as well as the fact that the promise to contribute to mitigating the growing chaos of climate change by reducing deforestation emissions has not advanced to date.

MPF also notes that in April 2024, FUNAI, the official Brazilian agency for Indigenous Peoples, put out a position statement on carbon credits on Indigenous lands. The statement includes the following advice:

FUNAI advises indigenous organisations and leaders not to participate in negotiations and arrangements involving the commercialisation of carbon credits on indigenous lands, suggesting that contracts not be signed until criteria and guidelines for the inclusion of indigenous lands in the voluntary carbon market are defined.

In addition, in June 2023, MPF and the Prosecution Service of the State of Pará published a technical note with recommendations regarding the protection of the rights of traditional peoples and communities in the context of the voluntary carbon market. The note highlights “constant conflicts related to the lack of prior consultation, the unequal distribution of benefits and land grabbing”.

Floods, droughts, and the climate crisis

MPF’s Legal Recommendation also notes that floods and droughts have been much more common in the past decade than since records began in the 1930s. Between 2014 and 2023, there were 314 records of floods, compared to 182 in the previous decade. Between 2014 and 2023 there were 406 records of droughts, compared to 92 in the previous decade.

2023, according to the World Meteorological Organisation, was the warmest year on record. MPF points out that the fossil fuel industry is responsible for a “significant share of global greenhouse gas emissions”. MPF refers to a paper by Peter C. Frumhoff, Richard Heede, and Naomi Oreskes published in Climatic Change that found that 63% of emissions could be traced to 83 of the world’s largest producers of coal, oil and natural gas, and the seven largest manufacturers of cement.

REDD projects and fake carbon credits

MPF also refers to the research carried out by The Guardian, Die Zeit, and SourceMaterial which found that more than 90% of REDD credits certified by Verra are worthless. This was in part based on a paper published in Science that found that most REDD projects have not reduced deforestation significantly and those that did had benefits that were lower than claimed.

And MPF refers to C-Quest’s cookstoves project in Malawi that over-issued million of carbon credits.

Then there’s the problem that it makes no sense to equate carbon in the fast carbon cycle (carbon that circulates between the atmosphere, land and seas) with carbon in the slow carbon cycle (carbon that circulates between the atmosphere and the rocks which make up Earth’s interior). Carbon stored in rainforests is part of the fast carbon cycle, while carbon stored below ground in fossil fuels is part of the slow carbon cycle.

MPF notes that REDD credits under investigation as part of Operation Greenwashing have been sold to airline companies, fossil fuel firms, and mining corporations.

Climate neutral claims

In September 2023, Mongabay published an year-long investigation, carried out with The New Humanitarian, raising questions about the UN’s claims to be climate neutral. Large numbers of carbon credits bought by the UN came from hydropower and wind projects — projects that do not need income from carbon credits to be viable.

At least 13 of the carbon projects that supplied the UN with carbon offsets “have been linked to reports of environmental damage, displacement, or health problems”.

MPF highlights the decisions by the advertising watchdog in the Netherlands to ban adverts by KLM and Shell. In Germany, the Düsseldorf Regional Court ruled that TotalEnergies could not claim that its heating oil is “CO₂ compensated”. This decision followed one of 15 legal cases taken out by Deutsche Umwelt Hilfe against companies making claims of being “climate neutral” based on buying carbon offsets.

MPF writes that,

A key argument in these court decisions was the fact that part of the fossil carbon will interfere with the climate for centuries and millennia, while REDD projects last at most a few decades, and after the project ends, it is not possible to ensure the continuous storage of carbon in trees for hundreds or even thousands of years, as it would be necessary to offset the climate impact of fossil carbon.

Monoculture eucalyptus plantations

In August 2023, MPF filed a lawsuit about monoculture eucalyptus plantations established in southern Bahia by the pulp and paper companies Suzano and Veracel.

The Federal Prosecutor Ramiro Rockenbach is the author of the legal action. He argues that, “it is absolutely necessary for the public authorities to act and fulfil their duty to identify public lands so that, under no circumstances, private entrepreneurs can indefinitely use what belongs to society as a whole and, in particular, to indigenous and traditional peoples”.

No free, prior informed consent

In May 2024, the Amazonas state government issued 21 concessions for REDD projects in areas in the state’s public forests. The projects cover an an area of 11.9 million hectares of public lands. 483 communities are potentially affected by these projects.

The projects could generate a total of US$1.6 billion. The companies involved are Future Carbon (Brazil) with 12 concessions, Ecosecurities (Switzerland) with three, and BR Carbon (Brazil), Carbonext (Brazil), and Permian Global (UK) with two each.

Carbonext is one of the companies with projects under investigation by the Federal Police as part of Operation Greenwashing.

These projects in the state of Amazonas were awarded despite the fact that neither the companies nor the government made any contact or consultation with the Indigenous and traditional communities who would be affected by the projects. MPF notes that this is in violation the requirements of free, prior and informed consent according to ILO Convention 169.

MPF spoke to several traditional leaders in Amazonas who told MPF that “there was no consultation or contact, that they do not know the proposal o even the operating model of carbon credits or REDD+ contracts”.

The Articulation of Indigenous Peoples and Organizations of the Amazonas (APIAM) filed a request with MPF requesting that the 21 REDD concessions be revoked.

In June 2024, MPF held an online discussion about carbon market problems and impacts on traditional peoples. “I can say that almost all indigenous peoples do not have a broad understanding of what REDD+ is,” Mariazinha Baré, executive coordinator of the Articulation of Indigenous Peoples and Organisations of Amazonas (APIAM), said during the event. “We have received several companies selling a ‘dream’ regarding the carbon market, but we do not have any concrete successful experience to replicate.”

In July 2024, more than 80 environmental organisation released a statement titled, “Why carbon offsetting undermines climate targets.” MPF notes that the letter states that,

Companies therefore have a responsibility to deeply and immediately reduce their own footprint by taking concrete measures to address the emissions in their global value chains, rather than simply buying credits to avoid tackling their own emissions problems. The difficulty to achieve these massive emission reductions cannot justify widely opening the door to creative accounting and climate distractions”

Land rights

MPF argues that the time and effort spent by governments, companies, and institutions could be focussed on land regularisation of territories of Indigenous Peoples and traditional populations, and strengthening surveillance and other measures to combat deforestation and environmental degradation.

MPF highlights the complexities of land titles in the Amazon rainforest, including the problem that private owners in some cases have notarised land titles overlapping areas of traditional use of traditional peoples and communities. In some cases this is a result of land grabbing, “that is, they are fraudulent, and have no legality”. Such as the land titles under investigation by “Operation Greenwash”, MPF writes.

In other cases, the deeds may be legally registered. However, MPF argues that traditional peoples and communities have used the land for decades or longer and have therefore obtained the right of ownership of the land.

This could “increase the costs and complexity . . . of validation and certification”

The Nature-based Solutions Brazil Alliance, a lobby organisation whose members include carbon traders, investors, and project developers, put out a statement defending REDD. Several of the companies with proposed REDD projects in Amazonas are members of the NBS Alliance.

The NBS Alliance says the quiet part out loud — that getting projects up and running is more important to the Alliance than concerns about Indigenous Peoples’ rights:

On the international stage, such a measure could be interpreted as a sign of ‘legal uncertainty’ in Brazil, driving away investments and directing them to other regions or countries. This could even make the development of new projects in Brazil unfeasible and increase the costs and complexity of analyses and requirements by international validation and certification bodies.

MPF told Carbon Pulse that the suspension recommendation is an “extrajudicial instrument” with “possible legal ramifications if their counsel was not followed”.

---