Terra de Direitos technical note denounces the lack of adequate consultation as a threat to the autonomy and governance of territories

In the year that Brazil hosts leaders, experts, and traditional peoples from all over the world at the 30th UN Climate Change Conference (COP 30), the Government of Pará is speeding up the implementation of the Jurisdictional REDD+ System. This mechanism provides for the Reduction of Emissions from Deforestation and Forest Degradation. However, the bill proceeds without respecting the fundamental principles of the right to prior, free, and informed consultation with indigenous peoples, quilombolas, and traditional communities, a right guaranteed in Convention 169 of the International Labor Organization (ILO), to which Brazil is a signatory.

The complaint is contained in a Technical Note prepared by Terra de Direitos and released today (17).  In the document, the organization analyzes the process conducted by the Pará government and warns of violations of fundamental rights and risks to the autonomy of traditional territories.

The absence of clear and accessible information about the REDD+ System, the limited number of consultations, participation, and deliberation spaces, as well as the centralization of decision-making among government agencies and a few representatives of traditional peoples and communities, are some of the identified violations.

“Consultation is not limited to listening to a small number of leaders or representative entities, nor is it conducted through public hearings or public consultations. It has its rite and must be carried out in accordance with appropriate procedures, so that the peoples concerned can participate freely, as provided for in Convention No. 169," states the Technical Note.

Access the full note here

Reports in the communities and documents made available by the government indicate that the entire process so far has taken place without adequate free, prior, and informed consultation with the traditional peoples and communities that will be affected.

"We only know that REDD+ is a state government project to sell carbon credits abroad, but we don't know much else about it: how did it happen? What's in it for us? So far, no one from the state has come here to the territory.  We had a few online meetings and didn't understand much. It's just the government imposing what it has already been doing," said a quilombola leader from Pará who preferred not to be identified.

Prior, free, and informed consultation should not be carried out in any way, especially when it comes to a financial compensation mechanism such as REED+, which has the potential to directly impact the governance and autonomy of the territories. For traditional peoples and communities, the forest holds values deeply linked to ancestry, belonging, way of life, and being. Still, for the government, it is just an economic transaction," says Selma, Terra de Direitos' legal advisor.

The advisor points out that the ILO and consultation protocols define the rite of prior consultation and that it is necessary to listen to whether or not communities want to join the REED+ project, without haste and without coercion, and with a guarantee that collective decisions will be respected.

According to Convention 169, prior, free, and informed consultation is mandatory when implementing projects, undertakings, legislative or administrative measures that impact the territories of indigenous peoples, quilombolas, and traditional communities, or their ways of life. In the case of the Pará REDD+ Jurisdictional System, the territories of these communities will be incorporated as areas for project implementation.

“The right to consultation, widely recognized internationally, is an essential tool for the realization of fundamental rights, ensuring respect for self-determination and the free definition of development priorities, as well as the effective protection of their territories, cultures, and ways of life,” highlights the technical note.

The case of REDD+ in Pará adds to international criticism of the use of carbon credits as "false solutions" to the climate crisis. Organizations, experts, and social movements argue that these mechanisms, when they fail to respect the rights of peoples, do not address the structural causes of environmental destruction and instead generate new forms of territorial exploitation.

"The Technical Note aims to strengthen the debate on the right to consultation, bringing elements identified of the potential violations of this right and the possible impacts that traditional peoples and communities may face, especially the limitation of the use of their territories and the need for this debate to reach all those impacted. It also points out recommendations for strategic actors to act in accordance with Brazilian and international legislation when implementing REED+ in Pará," said Selma Corrêa of Terra de Direitos.

Limited prior consultation: "There are communities that don't even know what we're deciding out here for them"

Public information available on the project website of the Pará State Secretariat of Environment and Sustainability (SEMAS) indicates that the Jurisdictional REDD+ System has been under construction since 2022, with workshops, seminars, and meetings that have defined crucial stages for its implementation. Despite this, the Technical Note indicates that the participation of indigenous peoples, quilombolas, and traditional communities recorded to date is low and does not accurately represent the diversity and size of these populations.

Despite this population and the prior consultation required by the Convention, the process of consulting traditional peoples only began in May, three years after the Jurisdictional System began to be built.

The Consultation Plan presented by the government in May foresees only 47 face-to-face consultations, which will be distributed among the segments, with an estimated audience of 150 people per consultation. According to the document, this approach would ensure broad participation.

According to the IBGE (2022), Pará has approximately 135,033 quilombolas, distributed across 125 territories (Iterpa) as of 2022. The indigenous population totals more than 80,000 people, belonging to 55 different peoples (IBGE 2022).  The state still has a large contingent of artisanal fishermen, ribeirinhos (river dwellers), extractivists, beiradeiros (riverbank dwellers), and family farmers, among others.

"Pará is a state populated by a diversity of groups with different ethnic and cultural identities, traditional ways of life, and their territoriality, which will potentially be affected by the implementation of the REED+ System. Reducing consultation to a limited number of people or organizations is to ignore the very existence of other people and communities. There are communities far from Belém, without access to the internet, without access to basic information about the project, and who are having their right to consultation violated," says Selma Corrêa.

In the case of the quilombolas, in addition to the reduced number of prior consultations (there will be 17 meetings for them), the number of participants in each consultation is quite limited. If the government's proposal is upheld, only 1.8% of the state's quilombolas will take part in the consultation process.

 "We had no prior consultation. Because our quilombola territory is required by law to have prior consultation. So far, no government that represents us has informed us, the community members and leaders, of these changes to our carbon. The government is already selling without us knowing, and by the time we know it, we've already been sold together."

In a recent interview with Agência Brasil, indigenous leader and environmental activist Alessandra Korap criticized the way the consultation is being conducted:

"They consult a few peoples, a few individuals, and don't really reach the leaders and the totality. Every contract we sign, we have to read. We don't even know what the contract says. How are you going to debate this contract in the communities? Some communities can only be reached in five days, requiring travel by plane or boat. There are communities without internet. There are communities with people fishing and hunting, who don't even know what we're deciding for them out here. There are territories with isolated peoples. Who is going to consult them? They also have decision-making power," she argues.

In addition to violating the right to prior, free, and informed consultation, the entire process of implementing the carbon market in Pará poses a significant risk to traditional peoples.  The lack of adequate prior consultation has a direct impact on territories, stripping traditional peoples and communities of their autonomy and governance over their lands. It also exposes populations to potential speculation on the carbon credit market.

Billions in carbon, without prior consultation

In November 2024, during Climate Week in New York (USA), Pará Governor Helder Barbalho signed an agreement of intent to buy and sell carbon credits with the LEAF Coalition (Lowering Emissions by Accelerating Forest Finance).

Indigenous leaders in the state reacted with indignation to the news, saying they had not been consulted beforehand. One of these voices was Alessandra Korap, who recently questioned the implementation of the state's carbon market in an interview.  

"Look, here in the state of Pará, we have a lot of problems. There are problems with drought, hunger, basic sanitation, the demarcation of indigenous lands, education, and health. And by the looks of this situation, it seems that the only solution to our problems is to sell carbon credits. We've always been free, and suddenly we're not going to be free anymore, and we're going to have to depend on the government and companies"

In light of the allegations, the [Federal Prosecutor's Office] Ministério Público Federal (MPF) filed a lawsuit in Federal Court requesting the suspension of the contract, employing an injunction, on the grounds that there was no prior, free, and informed consultation with traditional peoples and communities before the contracting and pricing of carbon credits. At the beginning of June, the Federal Court denied the request for an injunction; however, the lawsuit remains pending.

"The MPF has to demand this, because a consultation with only 100 people, when there are 10,000 indigenous people, is not a consultation. It's deceiving the people, deceiving the indigenous people who often don't know what carbon credits are, what they're selling," said Alessandra Korap, commenting on the MPF's action.

Risk to governance and territorial autonomy

Studies show that indigenous peoples and quilombolas are the most protective of forests. Data from MapBiomas shows that in 30 years, indigenous lands (TIs) have lost only 1% of their native vegetation, while quilombola territories (TQs) have lost 4.7%. In contrast, private areas have accumulated a loss of more than 20.6% compared to TIs and 17% compared to TQs. However, the implementation of a carbon market system could jeopardize this protection and the way of life of traditional communities. 

“The trading of carbon credits in traditional territories tends to cause extreme changes in the way of life of populations, since green areas will be blocked for traditional use due to participation in the jurisdictional carbon credit market, limiting the autonomy of communities to manage the natural resources of their territories sustainably, as they have always done,” warns the Technical Note

Several key pieces of information about how the REDD+ Jurisdictional System operates have not been properly clarified by the State Government. Among the doubts is the need to regularize the territories so that the credits, already sold, and the promised financial benefits can actually reach the communities.

"We enjoy and benefit from the forest. It is a source of life for us. It guarantees things for the people who live in the agro-extractivist territories, in the reserves. We need a lot, we need to plant and produce, but all within a balance. We can't let them destroy it because we need straw, a support, and wood for the houses and the chicken coops, which we can keep mending. The bark of a medicinal plant, vines for handicrafts, and for tying up fences and houses. It's a lot of things. Based on experiences that I have heard from an indigenous territory in Amazonas, it is not allowed. It's a bad thing for us, for our people. So, it is my view that this leads nowhere. It doesn't improve our quality of life, and it's even worse for the planet. The one who will suffer the most damage is the one who has to be restricted," said a family farmer leader.