5/2/2022
The use of fire as a method to facilitate and de-stem sugar cane cutting is a practice that has been widely used in agriculture, including in the State of São Paulo such procedure is regulated by State Law 10.547/00.
However, under the argument that the burning of straw degrades the environment, this practice has been challenged specially by the Public Prosecutor’s Office, considering the São Paulo State law unconstitutional.
And for a long time the Brazilian courts have been divided between the understanding that allows burning in cases authorized by law, and the understanding that the owner of the area is liable when burning is authorized by the relevant environmental agencies, considering it as an environmental issue and, therefore, a public interest protected by the Federal Constitution.
Within this debate, a recent decision rendered by the 1st Panel of the STJ (REsp 1.443.290), reported by Minister Benedito Gonçalves, when it rejected an appeal by the Public Prosecutor’s Office of Goiás in a case brought against agricultural companies, may finally pacify the issue.
The public civil action filed by the Public Prosecutor’s Office of the State of Goiás was granted in first instance. However, in the appellate court, it was understood that, since the practice was expressly authorized by the relevant environmental agencies, the burning is not illegal.
It should be pointed out that, according to the decision rendered, even if it is understood that it is possible for the public administration to authorize the burning of sugar cane straw in agro-industrial activities, the permission must be specific, preceded by an environmental impact study and licensing, with measures to mitigate environmental damage.
In the case in question, the companies proved to have IBAMA authorization to carry out the controlled burning of sugarcane straw, so the Court understood that the necessary environmental impact studies and licensing had already taken place, so that it was possible to obtain the authorization.
With the STJ’s decision, other courts will tend to follow this same orientation so that similar actions are decided in the same way.
Coauthors: Gislene Barbosa and Rammses Sato
