Anticipating the end of the deadline for conciliation, Nusol (Nucleus for Consensual Conflict Resolution) of the STF (Supreme Federal Court) filed this Thursday (14) a request to extend, for another 90 days, the deadline for negotiations related to actions on the Soy Moratorium.
The request was forwarded to the rapporteurs of the actions discussing state laws linked to the moratorium in the states of Mato Grosso and Rondônia.
Conciliation at the Supreme Court began in April, following a decision by the Court of . Without the extension requested here, the period would end in June.
According to the order filed this Thursday, the request to extend the deadline occurs due to the “high complexity” of the controversy, which involves economic, social and environmental impacts and requires “technical depth and continuous dialogue between the actors involved”.
After the group’s first meeting, which took place in April, it was agreed that the parties would have until the end of last month to .
This Thursday’s document also states that there has been progress in the negotiations already carried out and that the extension of the deadline seeks to “enable the continuity of ongoing negotiations and expand the possibilities of obtaining an adequate and stable consensual solution for the case”.
The order only asks for an extension and there is still no new meeting between the parties scheduled. The expectation, according to sources, is that the issue will cross the electoral calendar.
What is the moratorium?
The Soy Moratorium is an agreement signed in 2006 between trading companies, industry and civil society organizations to prevent the purchase of soy produced in deforested areas of the Amazon after July 2008.
The actions under analysis at the Supreme Court discuss the legality of state laws that attempt to limit the effects of the moratorium.
On the one hand, representatives of the productive sector claim that the agreement creates restrictions beyond those provided for in the Forest Code.
On the other, environmental organizations argue that the initiative helped reduce deforestation in the Amazon.
