The recent decision by the Brazilian Supreme Court (STF) in Direct Action of Unconstitutionality (ADI) No. 7.550 represents one of the most important rulings on the Brazilian land issue in recent years. Unanimously, the Supreme Court declared unconstitutional State Law No. 3.525/2019, as well as Laws No. 3.730/2020 and No. 3.896/2022, which sought to validate irregular real estate registrations of rural lands in the region. state of Tocantins.
The decision has enormous legal, environmental, and social relevance, as it prevents the consolidation of mechanisms that could facilitate the private appropriation of public lands and expand... agrarian conflicts and encouraging deforestation in the Cerrado. and in the Legal Amazon. In practice, state legislation recognized and validated, with the force of a property title, real estate registrations of rural properties whose origin was not based on legitimate titles of alienation or concession issued by the Public Authority.
Land grabbing consists of the illegal appropriation of public or private lands through document fraud, falsification of titles, manipulation of records, and irregular occupation. According to studies by the Amazon Environmental Research Institute (IPAM), Land grabbing is one of the main drivers of deforestation in Brazil., being associated with the uncontrolled expansion of the agricultural frontier, violence in the countryside, and the expulsion of traditional communities.
Unclaimed lands are public lands that have never legitimately entered private ownership. According to Article 188 of the Constitution, their allocation must comply with national agricultural policy and the agrarian reform plan or the protection of ecosystems, in accordance with § 5 of Article 225, and they cannot be indiscriminately transferred to private ownership.
The National Confederation of Rural Workers, Farmers and Family Farmers (Contag) filed ADI No. 7.550 with the support of several civil society organizations, including the Voices of Tocantins for Climate Justice Coalition, the Pastoral Land Commission (CPT), Alternative for Small-Scale Agriculture in Tocantins, the Resistance to Matopiba Articulation, the Society, Population and Nature Institute, and entities defending human rights and the environment.
It also concluded that the legislation violated the social function of property, the national agrarian reform policy, environmental protection, public assets, and the rights of indigenous peoples and traditional communities. According to the reporting minister, Nunes Marques, the law allowed the definitive transfer of public rural properties to private ownership without any prior verification of the area's origin, the existence of traditional occupation, compliance with its social function, the presence of environmental liabilities, or indigenous, quilombola, or protected areas.
From an environmental standpoint, the decision represents a very important milestone. The indiscriminate regularization of public areas would encourage new irregular occupations and further deforestation. By invalidating the legislation, the Supreme Court prevents areas that may have been illegally deforested from being converted into private property solely through land registry records. The decision also represents an important victory for indigenous peoples, quilombola communities, babaçu nut gatherers, geraizeiros, vazanteiros, agrarian reform settlers, and other traditional communities, historically affected by the overlapping of land registrations over areas historically occupied by them.
Following the ruling, the State of Tocantins filed a motion for clarification seeking to preserve real estate records and legal transactions carried out during the validity of the law. The Supreme Federal Court unanimously rejected the request, reaffirming that the modulation of effects is an exceptional measure and that, in this specific case, no concrete reasons of legal certainty or exceptional social interest were demonstrated.
More than a registration dispute, the ruling deals with the protection of public assets, the fight against land grabbing, environmental preservation, and the defense of the rights of traditional populations. By invalidating the Tocantins legislation, the Supreme Court reaffirms that the public authorities must conduct land regularization within constitutional limits, using technical criteria, respecting the public interest, and observing the social function of property.
In a context of increasing pressure on territories and natural resources, the decision represents an important precedent for protecting Brazilian public lands and building a development model that reconciles legal security, social justice, and environmental sustainability.
*Maria de Fatima Dourado is a lawyer, a member of the advocacy team of the Voices of Tocantins for Climate Justice Coalition, and a signatory of ADI 7550.
*Patrícia Silva is a specialist in Traditional Communities, a lawyer on the advocacy teams of the Voices of Tocantins for Climate Justice Coalition and the Institute for Society, Population and Nature (ISPN).
Article originally published in Brazil of Fact