Project
Amazon Watch / Maíra Irigaray
Barragem de Belo Monte no rio Xingu: 10 anos de impactos na Amazônia e de busca por reparações
A usina hidrelétrica de Belo Monte causou um desastre ambiental e social no coração da Amazônia: um dos ecossistemas mais importantes do planeta.
Essa situação só piorou desde que a usina começou a operar em 2016. A busca por justiça e reparação para as comunidades indígenas e ribeirinhas afetadas continua até hoje.
Em 2011, a Comissão Interamericana de Direitos Humanos (CIDH) concedeu a essas comunidades medidas de proteção, que até hoje não foram totalmente implementadas pelo Estado brasileiro.
E, desde junho daquele mesmo ano, a CIDH mantém um processo contra o Estado por sua responsabilidade internacional no caso.
A CIDH pode encaminhar o caso à Corte Interamericana de Direitos Humanos, que tem o poder de emitir uma sentença condenatória contra o Estado brasileiro.
Consulta o expediente de fatos do caso
Após 10 anos de operação da usina hidrelétrica e mais de 15 anos de violações de direitos humanos documentadas, é hora da justiça ser feita para as comunidades afetadas.
Leia a carta aberta das organizações que levam o caso à CIDH
Leia nosso comunicado à imprensa
Contexto
A usina hidrelétrica de Belo Monte — a quarta maior do mundo em capacidade instalada (11.233 MW) — foi construída no rio Xingu, no estado do Pará, norte do Brasil.
Foi inaugurada em 5 de maio de 2016, com uma única turbina. Naquela época, 80% do curso do rio foi desviado e 516 km² de terra foram inundados, uma área maior que a cidade de Chicago. Desse total, 400 km² eram de mata nativa. A usina começou a operar em plena capacidade em novembro de 2019.
Belo Monte foi construída e é operada pelo consórcio Norte Energia S.A., composto principalmente por empresas estatais. Foi financiada pelo Banco Nacional de Desenvolvimento Econômico e Social (BNDES), que aportou ao consórcio 25,4 bilhões de reais (aproximadamente US$ 10,16 bilhões), o maior investimento de sua história. Portanto, o BNDES também é legalmente responsável pelos impactos socioambientais associados ao projeto hidrelétrico.
Décadas de danos ambientais e humanos
As violações dos direitos humanos e a degradação da Amazônia remontam ao início do projeto. Em março de 2011, a Norte Energia iniciou a construção da barragem sem consulta adequada e sem o consentimento prévio, livre e informado das comunidades afetadas.
A construção levou ao deslocamento forçado de mais de 40.000 pessoas, rompendo laços sociais e culturais. O plano de reassentamento em Altamira — cidade diretamente afetada pelo projeto hidrelétrico — incluía moradias na periferia da cidade, sem serviços públicos adequados, moradias dignas para as famílias reassentadas e moradias diferenciadas para aqueles pertencentes a comunidades indígenas.
A operação da barragem de Belo Monte impôs uma seca permanente e artificial na Volta Grande do rio Xingu, agravada pelas secas históricas na Amazônia em 2023 e 2024. Como resultado, a morte de milhões de ovos de peixe foi documentada por quatro anos consecutivos (de 2021 a 2024) e, nos últimos três anos, não houve migração de peixes rio acima para desovar e se reproduzir. Assim, a pesca artesanal, principal fonte de proteína para os povos indígenas e comunidades ribeirinhas, foi severamente afetada: o consumo de peixe caiu de 50% para 30% do total de proteínas consumidas, sendo substituído por alimentos processados. Em suma, houve um colapso ambiental e humanitário que resultou no colapso da pesca como modo de vida tradicional, insegurança alimentar e falta de acesso à água potável para milhares de famílias, empobrecimento e doenças.
Além disso, a construção da barragem aumentou o desmatamento e intensificou a extração ilegal de madeira e a insegurança em terras indígenas e tribais, colocando em risco a sobrevivência dessas comunidades. Outra consequência foi o agravamento da pobreza e dos conflitos sociais, bem como a sobrecarga dos sistemas de saúde, educação e segurança pública em Altamira, cidade considerada a mais violenta do país em 2017, onde houve aumento do tráfico de pessoas e da violência sexual. Também foram registrados casos de violência contra defensores de direitos humanos envolvidos no caso.
Em 2025, durante a 30ª Conferência das Nações Unidas sobre Mudanças Climáticas (COP30), realizada no Brasil, o Ministério Público Federal classificou os danos causados por Belo Monte como ecocídio.
Foto: Amazon Watch / Maíra Irigaray.
A busca por justiça e reparação
Ao longo dos anos, o Ministério Público Federal do Pará, a Defensoria Pública e organizações da sociedade civil impetraram dezenas de ações judiciais em tribunais brasileiros para contestar as diversas irregularidades do projeto, bem como seus impactos. A maioria das ações permanece sem solução, algumas há mais de 10 anos.
Essas ações não obtiveram sucesso porque o governo federal tem reiteradamente anulado decisões favoráveis às comunidades afetadas, recorrendo a um mecanismo pelo qual o presidente do Supremo Tribunal Federal pode suspender uma decisão judicial com base unicamente em argumentos genéricos como "interesse nacional" ou "ordem econômica".
Diante da falta de respostas eficazes em nível nacional, a AIDA — juntamente com uma coalizão de organizações aliadas — levou o caso à Comissão Interamericana de Direitos Humanos (CIDH) e, em 2010, solicitou medidas cautelares para proteger a vida, a integridade e a saúde das comunidades indígenas afetadas.
Em 1º de abril de 2011, a CIDH concedeu essas medidas e solicitou ao Estado brasileiro a suspensão das licenças ambientais e de quaisquer obras de construção até que as condições relativas à consulta prévia e à proteção da saúde e integridade das comunidades fossem atendidas.
E, em 16 de junho de 2011, apresentamos uma denúncia formal à CIDH — juntamente com o Movimento Xingu Vivo Para Siempre, a Coordenação das Organizações Indígenas da Amazônia Brasileira, a Diocese de Altamira, o Conselho Missionário Indígena, a Sociedade Pará de Defesa dos Direitos Humanos e a Global Justice — contra o Estado brasileiro por sua responsabilidade internacional nas violações de direitos humanos contra os povos afetados neste caso. A denúncia foi apresentada em dezembro de 2015.
Em 3 de agosto de 2011, a CIDH modificou as medidas cautelares para solicitar — em vez da suspensão de licenças e obras — a proteção dos povos que vivem em isolamento voluntário, a saúde das comunidades indígenas e a regularização e proteção das terras ancestrais.
Foto: Amazon Watch / Maíra Irigaray.
Situação atual
As medidas de proteção concedidas pela CIDH permanecem em vigor, mas o Estado brasileiro não as cumpriu integralmente, relatando apenas ações genéricas. As comunidades documentaram as contínuas violações de seus direitos. A situação que motivou o pedido dessas medidas — o risco à vida, à segurança e aos meios de subsistência das comunidades — persiste e se agravou com a usina hidrelétrica operando em plena capacidade e com as recentes secas extremas na Amazônia.
Além do ocorrido em Belo Monte, existe o risco de maiores danos sociais e ambientais decorrentes da implementação de outro megaprojeto de mineração na Volta Grande do Xingu. Lá, a empresa canadense Belo Sun pretende construir a maior mina de ouro a céu aberto do Brasil.
Os impactos sinérgicos e cumulativos da usina e da mina não foram avaliados. O Estado excluiu povos indígenas, comunidades ribeirinhas e comunidades camponesas do processo de licenciamento ambiental do projeto. Apesar disso, dos protestos indígenas e de outras irregularidades em torno do projeto, o governo do estado do Pará autorizou formalmente a mina em abril de 2026.
Belo Monte, assim como outras usinas hidrelétricas, agrava a emergência climática ao gerar emissões de gases de efeito estufa em seu reservatório. Além disso, é ineficiente diante das secas prolongadas e intensas causadas pela crise, pois perde capacidade de geração de energia.
O caso perante a Comissão Interamericana
Em outubro de 2017, a CIDH anunciou que decidiria conjuntamente sobre a admissibilidade (se o caso preenche os requisitos para admissão) e o mérito (se houve, de fato, violação de direitos humanos) da denúncia internacional contra o Estado brasileiro.
Quinze anos após a apresentação da denúncia, as comunidades afetadas e as organizações que as representam ainda aguardam essa decisão. Caso a CIDH conclua que houve violações de direitos humanos e emita recomendações que o Estado brasileiro não cumpra, poderá encaminhar o caso à Corte Interamericana de Direitos Humanos, cujas decisões são vinculativas.
Uma possível decisão da Corte Internacional de Direitos Humanos neste caso estabeleceria um precedente jurídico regional em relação aos direitos dos povos indígenas e ribeirinhos, à participação pública em megaprojetos e à responsabilidade do Estado no contexto da crise climática. Isso é particularmente relevante à luz do Parecer Consultivo nº 32 da Corte, que reafirmou as obrigações dos Estados de proteger pessoas e comunidades em todo o continente da emergência climática.
Partners:
Related projects
Air pollution in Latin America and its effect on our health and climate
By Héctor Herrera, AIDA legal advisor and coordinator of the Network for Environmental Justice in Colombia, @RJAColombia According to the latest report from the Clean Air Institute, Monterrey, Guadalajara and Mexico City (Mexico), Cochabamba (Bolivia), Santiago (Chile), Lima (Peru), Bogota and Medellin (Colombia), Montevideo (Uruguay) and San Salvador (El Salvador) are 10 most polluted cities in Latin America. In all of them, the level of air pollution exceeds World Health Organization recommendations. The scene is similar in big cities across the region: buses and trucks spew out black smoke as people walk under grey skies. This is the backdrop in The Sound of Things Falling, an award-winning novel by Colombia’s Juan Gabriel Vásquez in which descriptions like this abound: “On the corner of Carrera Cuarta, the heavy afternoon traffic was moving slowly, in single file, toward the exit on to Avenida Jiménez. I found the gap in the traffic I needed to cross in front of a small bus whose recently illuminated headlights were catching the dust from the street, the smoke from exhaust pipes and the beginnings of a light drizzle.” Vásquez is writing about Bogota. But he could just as easily have been describing Monterrey or San Salvador. Residents of Latin America’s big cities live enveloped in smog. They breathe in the microparticles of black carbon, ozone, nitrogen dioxide and sulphur dioxide that comes with the air polluted by urban transport, industry and power plants. We can get riled up when a passing truck spits a cloud of smoke in our face. But our outrage fades almost as soon when we think that making these vehicles more environmentally friendly is not our responsibility. Those decisions lie out of our reach in the hands of politicians and bureaucrats. Even so, we must understand that air pollution is a problem that affects all of us and so it is important to be aware of the associated health risks. THE Clean Air Institute's report explains how breathing in air containing a high concentration of pollutants can reduce our quality of life and lead to illness or premature death. Thankfully, the report also makes recommendations on how to avoid this. Worryingly, public health is not the only casualty of air pollution. Another is a faster pace of climate change Black carbon and ozone are short-lived climate pollutants (SLCPs) that remain in the atmosphere from days to decades. While that is nothing compared with carbon dioxide, which remains in the atmosphere for more than a century, SLCPs contribute more to climate change than carbon dioxide. This means that if we were to significantly reduce SLCP emissions, we would get quick results in slowing climate change. You can find more information on AIDA’s page on SLCPs, including descriptions of the main pollutants and the steps being taken to encourage a reduction in their emission. All of what has been said here becomes particularly pertinent when you consider that the population and number of vehicles in Latin America is growing steadily, which unfortunately is not the case for the number of measures being introduced to reduce the level of air pollutants. Whatever our motives – whether this is to improve public health, slow climate change, protect our lungs or those of future generations, or even to simply enjoy a picturesque sunset without a wall of harmful gases blocking our view of the sea or the mountains, one thing is imperative. We must work so that the air in our cities across the Americas is clean and fresh.
Read moreGroups appeal to UN to halt imminent forced evictions of indigenous Ngöbe families
Appeal to the UN seeks to stop eviction of Panamanian community. Panama, Washington D.C., San Francisco, Lima. Environmental and human rights organizations submitted an urgent appeal to United Nations Special Rapporteurs on behalf of members of the indigenous Ngöbe community - the community faces imminent forced eviction from their land for the Barro Blanco hydroelectric dam project in western Panama. The eviction would force Ngöbe communities from their land, which provides their primary sources of food and water, means of subsistence, and culture. The urgent appeal, submitted by the Ngöbe organization Movimiento 10 de Abril para la Defensa del Rio Tabasará (M10) and three international NGOs, the Interamerican Association for Environmental Defense (AIDA), the Center for International Environmental Law (CIEL), and Earthjustice, asks the Special Rapporteurs to call upon the State of Panama to suspend the eviction process and dam construction until it complies with its obligations under international law. Given that the project is financed by the German and Dutch development banks (DEG and FMO, respectively) and the Central American Bank for Economic Integration (CABEI), the groups also urge the Special Rapporteurs to call on Germany, the Netherlands, and the member States of CABEI to suspend financing until each country has taken measures to remedy and prevent further violations of the Ngöbe's human rights. The forced evictions of the Ngöbe are the most recent threat arising from the Barro Blanco project. These evictions raise imminent violations of their human rights to adequate housing; property, including free, prior and informed consent; food, water and means of subsistence; culture; and education. "Our lands and natural resources are the most important aspects of our culture. Every day, we fear we will be forced from our home,"said Weni Bagama of the M10. The appeal highlights the fact that the Ngöbe were never consulted, nor gave consent to leave their land. "Panama must respect the rights of the Ngöbe indigenous peoples and refrain from evicting them. Executing these forced evictions will constitute a violation of international human rights law," said María José Veramendi Villa of AIDA. Also central to the appeal is the role of governments whose banks are funding the dam. "Under international law, States must ensure that their development banks do not finance projects that violate human rights, including extraterritorially. Forced eviction of the Ngöbe without their consent is reason enough to suspend financing of this project," said Abby Rubinson of Earthjustice. Barro Blanco's registration under the Kyoto Protocol's Clean Development Mechanism (CDM) is another point of concern. "Panama's failure to protect the Ngöbe from being forcibly displaced from their land without their consent casts serious doubt on the CDM's ability to ensure respect for human rights under international law," said Alyssa Johl of CIEL. "CDM projects must be designed and implemented in a manner that respects human rights obligations."
Read more
Mandela: lessons in tribal leadership to effectively protect the environment
“It always seems impossible until it becomes reality.” —Nelson Mandela Nelson Mandela died one month ago. Much has been written about him since then, and he has been globally honored like none other. Despite possible year-end amnesia and at the risk of sounding cliché, I am writing this post in his honor. I’m particularly interested in highlighting four leadership qualities Mandela possessed, and pointing out how those same qualities can help us be more effective environment defenders. Nelson Rolihlahla Mandela was born in Qunu, a Xhosa community in the state of Transkei, in the southeastern part of South Africa. Mandela’s birth name Rolihlahla means “troublemaker,” in the Xhosa language. But a schoolteacher began calling him Nelson, according to the custom of calling children by their English, rather than African, names. Another of Mandela’s names—Dalibunga (or founder of the bunga)—was given to him during a traditional initiation ceremony at the age of 16. He was also called Madiba, a name given by his tribe in honor of a Tembu chief who ruled during the 18th Century. According to tradition, Mandela was destined to be an advisor to the Tembu king. But he ended up being a leader far beyond the borders of the Transkei region, and changed the world even beyond South Africa. He was a leader of reconciliation and compromise. He had an enormous capacity for forgiveness and an ability work peacefully with, rather than seek revenge against, those who oppressed his people for centuries, and imprisoned him for 27 years. In what follows, I’d like to discuss four characteristics that Mandela exemplified. If we emulate these qualities, we can, like Mandela, help make the world a freer and more just place. 1. Values and a common cause as an absolute guide to decisions “There is no easy walk to freedom anywhere, and many of us will have to pass through the valley of the shadow of death again and again before we reach the mountaintop of our desires.” Mandela lived according to his values. He had the goal of ending apartheid and securing freedom for himself and his people. His desire for freedom guided each of his actions, including after he succeeded in ending apartheid in his country. Over the decades of his struggle, including more than a quarter century in prison, there were undoubtedly moments of despair and fear in which other people would have given up hope. Mandela and his colleagues, however, persisted. The cause that united them was greater than their individual will, and stronger than even Mandela himself. Although we cannot compare our work to the struggle against apartheid, we have indeed made important progress by rallying behind a common cause. One recent victory, in 2011, was a change in the Mexican Constitution in favor human rights. It would not have been possible without the joint work of our partner organizations, academia, and the Office of the High Commissioner of Mexico. 2. Conscientious, disciplined, committed and coherent “Running taught me valuable lessons. In cross-country competitions, training counted more than intrinsic ability, and I could compensate for a lack of natural aptitude with diligence and discipline. I applied this in everything I did.” Persistence and discipline were qualities that made a big difference for Mandela in reaching his goals. His commitment to every challenge, his clarity, and even his limitless stubbornness still manage to surprise us. His success was not achieved through supernatural powers, nor was there a single moment in which everything magically changed. On the contrary, Mandela’s achievements were a consequence of a life dedicated to study, work, and learning. He was constantly listening to others, building strategies, and rethinking them in order to achieve his goals. He made mistakes and bad decisions, but also had successes that collectively helped achieve his dream of freedom. Sometimes we feel that the results are impossible. In fact, they are, if we’re trying to reach them immediately. At AIDA, we have learned this in the case of La Oroya, in which we have had to be persistent and disciplined in order to achieve lasting results. With the people of La Oroya we have worked for change for 15 years, and we will continue until we achieve it. 3. All on the same side — there is no good vs. bad “If you want to make peace with your enemy, you should work with your enemy. Then he will become your partner.” I often wonder where South Africa would be if Mandela and his colleagues had not reached small agreements, if they had not overcome their many differences and moved forward. Moreover, what would have happened in that country if they had not been able to transcend hatred toward their oppressors in order to find peaceful and coordinated solutions? Surely, the outcome would have been a civil war with unimaginable consequences. One element that avoided such a catastrophe was Mandela’s constant ability to find solutions, reach agreements, maintain dialogue, and demand concrete results toward real change. No doubt, the process was not easy, quick, or smooth. But perseverance, clear goals, a desire to reach consensus, and the ability to find interlocutors made even the most complicated situations possible. When I think of our job of protecting the environment, I realize how much we lack and the great opportunity that lies before us. For example, instead of competing with colleagues at other organizations, or trying to defeat governments or corporations, we should remember that we are all working toward solutions to a common goal. The lure of “winning” and seeing others lose is powerful. But, surely, we will gain more if we work with our “enemies” and become partners instead. 4. A step back in celebration, a step forward in times of peril “It is better to lead from behind, and put others to the front, especially in celebration when good things occur. You step forward when there is danger. Then, people will appreciate your leadership.” Leadership is very different from being a dictator or a strongman. A person who is a true leader allows and encourages others to grow, develop and evolve in order to reach a common goal, even if they shine more than their bosses. Mandela was conscious of being a symbol so that everyone in South Africa could be free and treated as equals. Many times, he put that role above his own self-interest. On more than one occasion, Mandela had the possibility of improving his prison conditions or of obtaining early release. Instead, he chose to stay imprisoned because he believed that the conditions to dismantle apartheid were not met, and that the unjust system would not change if he were released. “Real leaders must be ready to sacrifice everything for the freedom of their people.” Sadly, contrary to what Mandela said, many “leaders” jump at the chance to receive medals, but have difficulty taking responsibility for the mistakes or shortcomings of their team. We must remember that the type of leadership that Mandela embodied can accomplish miracles. It translates into actions that allow changes no one would have thought possible—the fall of apartheid, for example, or a simple handshake between President Obama and Raul Castro, a symbol of reconciliation that took place at Mandela’s funeral. So, dear leaders, have a happy 2014! I invite you to consider these leadership skills and put them into practice. For your success, and for the survival of our planet!
Read more