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
What happened at the World Water Conference 2023?
By Yeny Rodríguez, Claudia Velarde and Rosa Peña* The UN Water Conference 2023, held March 22-24 in New York, was organized in response to the need to evaluate the fulfillment of global goals and targets in the areas of water and sanitation, about which there is growing concern. AIDA participated in the Conference to position key messages from Latin America and the Caribbean that should be made visible and included in the discussions and that should now be part of the fulfillment of the Water Action Agenda, which was adopted at the global meeting. What follows is our take on the important event and what we hope will come of it in the future. The Advances An agenda for urgent action The Conference concluded with the adoption of the Water Action Agenda, a plan that included 689 commitments—collected from the official sessions and side events—as well as pledges of $300 billion dollars in financing to drive them forward. The commitments cover capacity building, data and monitoring systems, and improving infrastructure resilience, among other actions. The online platform hosting the Agenda will remain open for submissions. Overall, the Conference served as a global call to protect water and the water cycle as a global common good and a fundamental human right. The international community was also alerted to the need for urgent action to address the water crisis—which translates into shortages and droughts, contamination of water sources, degradation of strategic ecosystems and serious governance problems— which today particularly affects the world's indigenous peoples, Afro-descendants and rural communities. It’s important that the commitments made be incorporated into climate discussions, since the water crisis and the climate crisis are closely interconnected. The drive for fair water governance Innovative initiatives for the protection of ecosystems and for fair water governance were launched at the Conference. Water governance involves decision-making processes, as well as institutions and power relations that influence the flow, quality, use, availability and distribution of water (fresh or salt, surface or subsurface). One such initiative was the Transformative Water Pact, built collectively by a diverse group of more than 40 civil society organizations and academia, including AIDA. The Dutch NGO Both ENDS and the International Water Knowledge Institute (IHE-Delft) spearheaded the initiative. The Pact proposes an alternative vision of water management based on the principles of environmental justice, equity and care. It proposes frameworks for action and strategic priorities to guide decision-making. It is a response to the continued overexploitation and degradation of freshwater ecosystems, human rights violations, and the extreme power imbalances that characterize current water management around the world. The Inspiring The role of women and indigenous peoples The presence of civil society at the Conference was mostly female. This both revealed the intersectional nature of the inequalities that women experience on a daily basis in their struggles for water, and vindicated their important role in water management. Women possess and transmit traditional ecological knowledge for the care of water, lead struggles in its defense, and are more frequently exposed to risks and threats to their lives. Yet their voice is often disregarded, and they are not often invited to participate in environmental decision-making spaces. Similarly, important indigenous leaders from across Latin America and the world attended the Conference. This showed how much we have to learn from indigenous ancestral practices for the care of water, as well as the decisive role that indigenous and traditional communities play in the care of 80 percent of the planet's biodiversity and in the mitigation of the climate and water crises. The parallel events in which these actors participated made the world reconsider and reevaluate what the West has understood from science, making it clear that the ancestral knowledge system of indigenous peoples is specialized and sophisticated, and therefore must be prioritized in any policy of integrated and fair water management. The unity of civil society for water justice Although largely absent from official UN spaces, civil society had a strong and inspiring presence at the Conference. Organizations, activists and water advocates from around the world held important conversations and called for effective participation, with their own voice, in these spaces. "When you ask me about this conference, I can tell you that I am optimistic, not because of the results, but because of the spirit that was born thanks to you," said Pedro Arrojo-Agudo, UN Special Rapporteur on the human rights to safe drinking water and sanitation, to a room full of civil society members and water defenders. "The UN needs the energy and legitimacy that water defenders' movements are offering and I am sure it will come." Representatives of more than 500 organizations, indigenous peoples, social movements and water defenders presented the Water Justice Manifesto with the intention of amplifying the voices of those who are not being heard and insisting that fundamental issues be placed at the center of water policies at the global, regional, national and subnational levels. Although not scheduled, movement leaders were able to read the manifesto in an official space at the Conference, which allowed for its entry into the central dialogue. What was Missing Guarantees for the effective fulfillment of commitments Although the Conference was a unique and relevant opportunity to place water-related issues on the world agenda, there is still a long way to go toward achieving effective commitments from nations, as those included in the Water Action Agenda are not legally binding. In the near future, we need these commitments to be binding, and for there to be a follow-up mechanism, indicators to measure the progress made by States in fulfilling the Agenda and – why not? – a specialized international instrument for the protection of the human right to water and sanitation. A more open and inclusive participation in the dialogue Practically all sectors echoed the need for greater participation in official UN spaces and in future conferences. This requires a broad understanding of the water crisis and the intersectional movement needed to address it justly. It implies thinking about participation based on the inclusion of stakeholders on an equal footing for dialogue and, at the same time, recognizing the individuals, communities and peoples who hold the right to water, whose voice must be taken into account in a differential manner given their interdependent relationship with water. Recognition of the valuable role of water defenders In Latin America, defending rivers, lagoons, streams, aquifers and, in general, the right to water is a risky activity. Water is a natural resource in dispute. Those who work to safeguard it for human consumption or for its recognition as an enforceable right have for years been subjected to stigmatization, threats, persecution and attacks on their lives and integrity. The water agenda must recognize the important role of water defenders, as well as promote the creation of instruments and mechanisms aimed at providing greater guarantees to those who dedicate their lives to this work. The promotion of horizontal alliances and articulations for the protection of water The protection of water is a task of all States with differentiated responsibilities and capacities. Its effective achievement requires initiatives and processes of international cooperation, alliances and articulations among States based on mutual respect and recognition. This will make it possible to reach consensual paths and prevent the repetition of dynamics of imposition. Furthermore, these articulations must recognize and respect the normative frameworks of indigenous peoples so that, based on their uses and customs, they can continue to play their fundamental role in the protection and management of water. What’s Next It’s expected that the commitments contained in the Water Action Agenda will be reviewed and endorsed internally by Latin American governments and promoted at the international level at upcoming summits and high-level meetings. It’s also expected that the importance of protecting the human right to water and sanitation will be a key theme in all international forums where progress on the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) is discussed, such as the SDG Summit scheduled for September, and especially at the 28th United Nations Climate Change Conference (COP28). AIDA will continue to work to protect key ecosystems, prevent industrial pressure on water, advocate for the participation of local communities in decision-making about their water sources, and defend the human right to water. *Yeny Rodríguez is an attorney with AIDA's Ecosystems Program, Claudia Velarde is Area Coordinator of Ecosystems Program y Rosa Peña is an attorney with Human Rights and Environment Program.
Read more
Strategic litigation and its role in the pursuit of justice
In La Guajira, Colombia, indigenous Wayuu and Afro-Colombian communities—accompanied by civil society organizations—initiated litigation to defend their rights to water, food security and ethnic integrity, all of which are at risk from the diversion of the Bruno stream for the expansion of El Cerrejón, the largest open-pit coal mine in Latin America. The goal of bringing this particular case to court is not only to prevent the loss of an important water source. The litigation also seeks to set a precedent in the country and on the continent for the protection of rural communities against the systematic violation of their rights. It also represents an important action in the face of the climate crisis, a global problem aggravated by the continued extraction and burning of coal and other fossil fuels. The case can be categorized as strategic litigation, also called impact litigation, which consists of selecting and filing a lawsuit in order to promote the protection of rights or changes in public policy, while achieving broad changes in society, i.e., those that extend beyond a particular case. Strategic litigation is a tool that, through the law, promotes social transformations and strengthens human rights protections. It is strategic because, based on a legal cause, it seeks to change unjust realities and position issues that are key to the formation of a democratic society. In this sense, the ultimate goal of strategic litigation is to leave a lasting mark, a judicial precedent that can be replicated. It is also strategic because it includes the use of communication strategies, social mobilization, and political advocacy to put relevant debates on the table regarding the recognition of rights. When legal actions involve local communities, they also become a tool to help strengthen their internal processes of defense. Its premises and characteristics have made strategic litigation an important means to promote the protection of key ecosystems and human rights, including the right to health and a healthy environment, and the rights of indigenous peoples, communities and groups in vulnerable situations. Components As described above, strategic litigation is consciously designed to achieve broad goals and to generate a roadmap for future litigation. It consists of many different elements, including the following: A robust legal strategy that, on many occasions, must be enriched with interdisciplinary technical and scientific arguments. A communications strategy. Social or community organizing, which means involving communities, networks and local organizations in all phases of the litigation under a perspective of active participation and collective strategy construction. A strategy to protect against scenarios of risk that the litigation may cause. Political advocacy before decision-makers. Objectives and scope Although there are many, three main objectives of strategic litigation are to: Place important debates in the public opinion. Promote social mobilization around a common cause. Strengthen the rule of law, which means that citizens invite the State and judges to recognize rights, make problems visible, and ultimately strengthen the democratic system. Strategic litigation has been especially important for struggles and causes in which it is difficult for social movements and communities to position the recognition of their rights in legislative and public policy agendas. At AIDA, we believe that all people should have full access to environmental justice, and strategic litigation has been a powerful tool to guarantee the individual and collective right to a healthy environment in Latin America. To achieve this, we select emblematic cases and projects where the strategic use of international law and scientific argumentation can set key precedents. We work closely with local organizations and allies to jointly build the litigation process, design communication campaigns, and complete risk analyses that promote the protection of all stakeholders involved in litigation.
Read more
Commitments to marine conservation: A look back at Our Ocean 2023
"Our ocean, our connection." That was the theme of the eighth Our Ocean Conference, held March 2-3 in Panama, the first Latin American country to host the annual event. The conference began in 2014 as an initiative of the U.S. State Department to draw international attention to the serious global threats to the ocean and to secure to concrete commitments for marine conservation and sustainable development. The event brought together heads of state and representatives of the private sector, civil society and academic institutions under the specific objective of highlighting the urgency of implementing effective area-based management measures as part of interconnected systems including marine protected areas, the development of a global blue economy, and approaching innovative solutions to marine pollution. An AIDA delegation attended the conference and participated in the plenary sessions and side events. The following is a summary of the event. The inspiring The focus of the conference Our Ocean is not a space for sharing knowledge about this vast ecosystem and its biodiversity. The environmental community already knows for certain that the ocean must be effectively protected as soon as possible and that there is no need to present further evidence of the multiple services it has provided to humanity for centuries. The conference brought together leaders and ministers to advance international agreements and pressure nations to commit to taking the necessary steps to protect the ocean. The power of a generation The voice of youth was prominent throughout the conference, represented for example by more than 70 members of the Sustainable Ocean Alliance (SOA), which since 2014 has built the world's largest network of new generations of people working to create solutions to the ocean's greatest challenges. Hearing youth leaders speak passionately about the importance of caring for the planet for generations to come was encouraging. As the youngest member of AIDA, I found inspiration in meeting other young people advocating for the ocean and its biodiversity. In my daily work I’m surrounded by news and numbers about the damage humanity has caused to the ocean and being part of this conference helped me see the other side of the coin. Those of us who are actively working for a healthier, cleaner and more protected ocean are part of the change and, in large part, it is thanks to us that high officials have stopped to look at the evidence and take concrete action. It is this generation that will inherit the management of the ecological crisis, whose voice deserves to be reflected in commitments to improve the way we relate to the ocean. The positive Support for seabed defense AIDA co-hosted a side event on deep-sea mining with the not-so-simple task of bringing together decision-makers to support a moratorium on deep-sea mining and seabed protection. Thanks to the impetus of a group of co-organizers—including young people from Comms Inc, The Oxygen Project, Only One and SOA—Palau President Surangel Whipps Jr. and Fiji Prime Minister Sitiveni Rabuka attended the event. High-level representatives from Latin American and European countries also attended. It was a space for dialogue between civil society and invited authorities that resulted in encouraging commitments, including France's commitment (seconded by Germany) to invest in scientific research of the seabed and to stop investments in industrial processes related to deep-sea mining. World-renowned oceanographer Sylvia Earle touched the audience with her love for the ocean and her undying commitment to its protection. Those who attended reaffirmed their commitment to the moratorium and the search for alternatives. Commitments to marine biodiversity Overall, the conference provided a unique platform for several nations to make valuable commitments. Participating government delegations made 341 commitments worth nearly $20 billion, including funds to expand and enhance marine protected areas and biodiversity corridors. In Latin America, Panama announced the expansion of Banco Volcán, a marine reserve in the Caribbean, from 14,212 to 93,000 square kilometers. With this, Panama will be protecting 54 percent of its exclusive economic zone, meeting the goal of protecting 30 percent of its territory by 2030. And Ecuador committed to protecting its first eighty nautical miles (14,800 square kilometers), allowing for only artisanal fishing. This decision positions Ecuador as a Latin American leader in marine conservation and sustainable natural resource management. Ecuador called on the other countries that make up the Pacific Marine Corridor—Costa Rica, Panama and Colombia—to take similar measures to preserve one of the most biodiverse spaces in the ocean. What's next? Nations are now expected to comply with their announced commitments. In the region, Panama and Ecuador must expand their protected territories, ensuring the adequate monitoring of biodiversity and the sustainable management of resources. Similarly, it is expected that the countries of the Pacific, Latin America and the European Union that have declared their support for halting deep-sea mining will continue with actions consistent with that position, including active participation in meetings of the Seabed Authority, supporting the moratorium or precautionary pause on extractive activity. While there is certainly a long way to go, each decision announced at the conference in favor of preserving marine biodiversity provides some hope and motivation for our work. We will continue to collaborate with governments and communities to preserve the ocean, the planet's largest and most diverse ecosystem.
Read more