Project
Amazon Watch / Maíra Irigaray
The Belo Monte Dam on the Xingu River: 10 years of impacts in the Amazon and the search for reparations
The Belo Monte Dam has caused an environmental and social disaster in the heart of the Amazon—one of the most important ecosystems on the planet.
This situation has only worsened since the hydroelectric plant began operations in 2016. The quest for justice and reparations by the affected indigenous, fishing, and riverine communities continues to this day.
In 2011, the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights (IACHR) granted them protective measures that, to date, have not been fully implemented by the Brazilian State.
Furthermore, since June of that same year, the IACHR has yet to rule on a complaint against the State regarding its international responsibility in the case.
The IACHR may refer the case to the Inter-American Court of Human Rights, which has the authority to issue a ruling condemning the Brazilian State.
After 10 years of the hydroelectric plant's operation and more than 15 years of documented human rights violations, it is time for justice to be served for the affected communities.
Read the open letter from the organizations bringing the case before the IACHR
Background
The Belo Monte hydroelectric plant—the fourth largest in the world by installed capacity (11,233 MW)—was built on the Xingu River in Pará, a state in northern Brazil.
It was inaugurated on May 5, 2016, with a single turbine. At that time, 80% of the river’s course was diverted, flooding 516 km² of land—an area larger than the city of Chicago. Of that area, 400 km² was native forest. The dam began operating at full capacity in November 2019.
Belo Monte was built and is operated by the Norte Energia S.A. consortium, which is composed primarily of state-owned companies. It was financed by the Brazilian Development Bank (BNDES), which provided the consortium with 25.4 billion reais (approximately US$10.16 billion), the largest investment in the bank’s history. Therefore, the BNDES is also legally responsible for the socio-environmental impacts associated with the hydroelectric plant.
Decades of harm to the environment and people
Human rights violations and degradation of the Amazon have been occurring since the project’s inception. In March 2011, Norte Energía began construction of the dam without adequate consultation and without the prior, free, and informed consent of the affected communities.
The construction caused the forced displacement of more than 40,000 people, severing social and cultural ties. The resettlement plan in Altamira—a city directly affected by the hydroelectric dam—involved housing units located on the outskirts, lacking adequate public services and decent living conditions for the relocated families, with no special provisions for those from indigenous communities.
Belo Monte's operations have caused a permanent, man-made drought in the Volta Grande (or "Great Bend") of the Xingu River, exacerbated by the historic droughts in the Amazon in 2023 and 2024. As a result, the deaths of millions of fish eggs were documented for four consecutive years (from 2021 to 2024), and for the past three years, there has been no upstream migration of fish to spawn and reproduce. Thus, artisanal fishing, the main source of protein for indigenous peoples and riverside communities, was severely affected: fish dropped from 50% to 30% of total protein consumed, replaced by processed foods. In summary, there was an environmental and humanitarian collapse that resulted in the breakdown of fishing as a traditional way of life, food insecurity, and access to drinking water for thousands of families, impoverishment, and disease.
Furthermore, the construction of the dam increased deforestation and intensified illegal logging and insecurity on indigenous and tribal lands, putting the survival of these communities at risk. Another consequence was the deepening of poverty and social conflicts, as well as the strain on health, education, and public safety systems in Altamira—a city ranked as the most violent in the country in 2017, where human trafficking and sexual violence increased. Violence was also reported against human rights defenders involved in the case.
In 2025, during the 30th UN Climate Change Conference (COP30), held in Brazil, the Federal Public Prosecutor’s Office labeled the damage caused by the Belo Monte dam as ecocide.
Photo: Amazon Watch / Maíra Irigaray.
The search for justice and reparations
Over the years, the Federal Public Prosecutor’s Office in Pará, the Public Defender’s Office, and civil society organizations have filed dozens of legal actions in Brazilian courts to challenge the project’s various irregularities and its impacts. Most of the claims are still pending resolution, some for more than 10 years.
These efforts have failed because the national government has repeatedly overturned rulings in favor of the affected communities by invoking a mechanism that allowed a court president to suspend a judicial decision based solely on generic arguments such as "the national interest" or "economic order."
In the absence of effective responses at the national level, AIDA, together with a coalition of partner organizations, brought the case before the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights (IACHR) and, in 2010, requested precautionary measures to protect the lives, safety, and health of the affected indigenous communities.
On April 1, 2011, the IACHR granted these measures and requested that the Brazilian government suspend environmental permits and any construction work until the conditions related to prior consultation and the protection of the health and safety of the communities are met.
And on June 16, 2011 —together with the Xingu Vivo Para Sempre Movement, the Coordinating Committee of Indigenous Organizations of the Brazilian Amazon, the Diocese of Altamira, the Indigenous Missionary Council, the Pará Society for the Defense of Human Rights and Global Justice— we filed a formal complaint against the Brazilian State for its international responsibility in the violation of the human rights of the people affected in the case. The case was opened for processing in December 2015.
On August 3, 2011, the IACHR amended the precautionary measures to request, instead of the suspension of permits and construction, the protection of people living in voluntary isolation, the health of indigenous communities, and the regularization and protection of ancestral lands.
Photo: Amazon Watch / Maíra Irigaray.
Current situation
The protective measures granted by the IACHR remain in effect, but the Brazilian government has not fully complied with them, reporting only on general actions. The communities have documented the ongoing violations of their rights. The situation that prompted the request for these measures—the risk to the lives, physical integrity, and ways of life of the communities—persists and has worsened with the hydroelectric plant operating at full capacity and the recent extreme droughts in the Amazon.
In addition to the impacts of Belo Monte, there is a risk of further social and environmental impacts from the implementation of another mining megaproject in the Volta Grande do Xingu. There, the Canadian company Belo Sun plans to build Brazil’s largest open-pit gold mine.
The combined and cumulative impacts of the dam and the mine were not assessed. The government excluded Indigenous peoples, riverine and peasant communities from the project’s environmental permitting process. Despite protests by Indigenous communities and other irregularities surrounding the project, the government of Pará formally authorized the mine in April 2026.
Like other hydroelectric dams, Belo Monte exacerbates the climate emergency by generating greenhouse gas emissions in its reservoir. And it is inefficient amid the longer, more intense droughts caused by the crisis, as it loses its ability to generate power.
The case before the Inter-American Commission
In October 2017, the IACHR announced that it would rule jointly on the admissibility (whether the case meets the requirements for admission) and the merits (whether a human rights violation actually occurred) of the international complaint against the Brazilian State.
Fifteen years after the complaint was filed, the affected communities and the organizations representing them are still awaiting this decision. If the IACHR concludes that human rights violations occurred and issues recommendations that the Brazilian State fails to comply with, it may refer the case to the Inter-American Court of Human Rights, whose rulings are binding.
A potential ruling by the international court in this case would set a regional legal precedent regarding the rights of indigenous and riverine peoples, public participation in megaprojects, and state responsibility in the context of the climate crisis—a precedent that is particularly relevant in light of the Court’s Advisory Opinion No. 32, which reaffirmed the obligations of States to protect the people and communities of the continent from the climate emergency.
Partners:
Related projects
Mexico Threatens to Dam a River of Life
Every June 24, the Cora indigenous community celebrates the Day of San Juan. Gathering on the banks of a full-flowing river in western Mexico, they swap figures of the saint and offer him flowers in exchange for food, health, work and other favors. They also pay respect to San Pedro Mezquital, a river that is critical to their culture, livelihoods and spirituality. San Pedro Mezquital is the only dam-free river left in the Sierra Madre Occidental mountains where the Cora live. Starting in Durango, the river flows freely to the Pacific Ocean, where it feeds the Marismas Nacionales, a wetland of international importance and home to 20% of Mexico’s mangroves. But the river could be destroyed. Mexico’s state power company, the Comision Federal de Electricidad (CFE), wants to dam the San Pedro Mezquital to produce electricity, a project that would harm the environment and the human rights of indigenous people in the area, including the Cora. AIDA wants to stop this. We are working with local organizations and scientists to prepare a legal case based on environmental and human rights arguments. The aim is to deter the Mexican government from approving the environmental impact assessment (EIA) that would allow the CFE to start building the Las Cruces hydropower project. We have also launched a national campaign to raise awareness on why Las Cruces should never be built, with a website (in Spanish) focused exclusively on the issue. Arguments Against Las Cruces Dam Here are a few of the arguments against Las Cruces: Blocking the natural flow of the river will increase sedimentation and damage the mangroves of Marismas Nacionales. The project’s EIA fails to evaluate the cumulative environmental impacts and doesn’t use the best available scientific information. Construction of the dam will forcibly displace people and communities, possibly without compensation. The latter is not mentioned in the EIA. Indigenous peoples were not consulted on the feasibility studies of the project or its construction. Reduced river flow will affect the daily activities (agriculture, livestock, fishing, oysters, etc.) that provide food and work for the surrounding communities. Ceremonial locations will be flooded, destroying significant aspects of the spiritual life and ancient cultures of the natives in the area. On any given day, Coras and other local people jump into the San Pedro Mezquital for a swim in waters that provide a refreshing break – and their livelihoods. With your help, we can keep this and other rivers from getting destroyed by large dams like Las Cruces! Thank you!
Read more
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