Brazil: Deforestation dispute reaches Supreme Court
The soy moratorium, an agreement focused on protecting the Amazon Forest from soybean expansion, has reached Brazil’s highest court amid a dispute between farmers, exporting companies and environmentalists.
Signed in 2006, the agreement prohibits the purchase of soybeans from areas deforested after July 2008. Major trading companies such as Amaggi, Cargill, and Bunge are amongst the signers, which have pledged not to buy grains from land that does not comply with this criterion.
However, rural producers argue that these companies have formed a cartel to block access to international markets. They also claim that these requirements are illegal, as they go beyond Brazil’s Forest Code, which already mandates protecting up to 80% of native vegetation within the Amazon biome.
Left-wing parties and environmentalists have taken the dispute to the Supreme Federal Court (STF), Brazil’s highest judicial authority, filing a direct action of unconstitutionality.
Brazil’s Forest Code, one of the strictest in the world, remains the foundation for the country’s environmental management, with clear restrictions on deforestation and requirements for rural properties to protect native vegetation.
One of the most effective initiatives
From an environmental perspective, the moratorium has been recognised as one of the most effective initiatives in reducing deforestation linked to soybean production in the Amazon. Annual reports show that soy’s role in the region’s deforestation has dropped significantly since its implementation. In the early years of the agreement, there was a notable reduction in deforestation related to soybean cultivation. Studies indicate that before the moratorium about 30% of soy expansion resulted in deforestation, a figure that has since dropped to less than 1.5% following the agreement’s enforcement in 2008.
Environmental aspects
In October 2024, the Legislative Assembly of Mato Grosso approved Law No. 12,709/2024, which was later sanctioned by Governor Mauro Mendes and directly impacted the Soy Moratorium. Mato Grosso is Brazil’s largest State soybean producer and, if it were a country, the fourth-largest globally, producing 44 million tonnes. The new law prohibits companies signing restrictive laws on agricultural expansion beyond Brazil’s environmental legislation from receiving tax incentives or public land concessions in the state.
The justification for the law’s approval is that the Soy Moratorium harms farmers who have legally deforested up to 20% of their properties in the Amazon, as allowed by the Forest Code. This same argument is used by farmers to challenge the European Union’s Anti-Deforestation Law, although the EU regulation mandates zero deforestation for soybeans and other commodities after 31 December 2020. “The moratorium has negatively impacted our economy. We are confident that this initiative will be a step towards achieving justice for producers and Mato Grosso as a whole,” said Lucas Costa Beber, president of Aprosoja-MT (Mato Grosso’s Soybean and Maize Producers Association). According to the association, around 85 municipalities and 2.7 million hectares in the state are affected by the moratorium, resulting in economic losses exceeding R$20 billion.
Official statement
Meanwhile, Abiove (the Brazilian Association of Vegetable Oil Industries), a representative of grain trading companies and processors, responded to All About Feed through an official statement. In the document, the entity and its affiliated companies declare themselves “strong defenders of the Soy Moratorium and its indisputable positive legacy.” “Established in 2006, the multi-sector agreement involves the public and private sectors as well as civil society and contributes to the economic development of the Amazon biome while preserving thousands of hectares of forests,” the statement reads. However, Abiove acknowledges the need to update the Soy Moratorium, considering it was created almost 20 years ago.
“Brazil’s Forest Code, one of the strictest in the world, remains the foundation for the country’s environmental management, with clear restrictions on deforestation and requirements for rural properties to protect native vegetation,” the statement adds.
Commercial aspects
Aprosoja-MT also questions the impact on free enterprise, having submitted a formal request to the Administrative Council for Economic Defence (CADE)—Brazil’s antitrust authority — to evaluate the commercial practices of the companies that signed the Soy Moratorium. According to the association, the agreement affects producers who strictly follow Brazil’s environmental regulations, making their activities more difficult, as 90% of the traders that signed the agreement refuse to buy soybeans from legally deforested areas.
“By disregarding Brazilian legislation, the Soy Moratorium has ceased to be an environmental solution and has instead become an obstacle to the economic progress of entire regions,” said Lucas Costa Beber, president of Aprosoja-MT.
For Abiove, however, the initiative positions Brazil as a global leader in environmental conservation and is internationally recognised as an example of reconciling large-scale agricultural production with sustainability. “In recent years, the Multi-Sector Agreement has faced significant challenges. In addition to an administrative inquiry opened by CADE, state laws have been approved to render the Moratorium unfeasible in its current form,” Abiove acknowledges in its statement.
Nonetheless, the entity aims to deepen discussions with all stakeholders, including producers and policymakers, to establish strategies to reinforce Brazil’s reputation as a global leader in sustainable agricultural production.
Supreme Court
In December 2024, Justice Flávio Dino, the case’s rapporteur, suspended the law’s effects until a final ruling, arguing that it could violate the principle of free enterprise by creating an unequal market environment for companies.
In February 2025, representatives of Aprosoja and state legislators met with the justice to defend the law’s constitutionality and request a swift resolution for the case. The Mato Grosso government also requested that the case be temporarily removed from the court’s agenda, seeking a consensual solution with Abiove. In response, the STF temporarily suspended the trial, aiming to promote conciliation between the parties involved.
Join 26,000+ subscribers
Subscribe to our newsletter to stay updated about all the need-to-know content in the feed sector, three times a week.
