No criteria, no reparation

the methodology of individual compensation in the Braskem-Maceió Case

Abstract

In view of the socio-environmental disaster caused by the land subsidence phenomenon in the municipality of Maceió-AL, Brazil, associated with the extraction of rock salt by the Braskem company, and the consequent need to evacuate entire neighborhoods in the city, with the dis­placement of more than 60,000 people, 4 Public Civil Actions were filed by the Federal Public Prosecutor’s Office. One of these lawsuits was specifically aimed at compensating the victims of the tragedy, and an agreement was reached in court that led to the compensation procedure being carried out on an individual basis for the families and businesses affected. This article, developed through a systematic bibliographical and documentary review, aims to propose a detailed analysis of the methodology for compensating the victims of the Braskem-Maceió mining tragedy, through analysis of the agreement signed within the scope of the Public Civil Action, its supplementary terms and resolutions, as well as its methodology and criteria (or lack thereof), also evaluating the effects of the collective agreement on the individual agree­ments signed as a result. The conclusion is that the absence of clear and adequate criteria and methodology conferred greater discretionary power upon the company over the victims, resulting in standardized compensation in evidently insufficient amounts that were not even clearly backed up by the extent of the damage being compensated. In addition, it should be noted that the socio-environmental risks resulting from the agreement may be further aggrav-ated, given that the company ended up buying the victims’ properties – in an operation that conflates compensation with a sale and purchase transaction – and that the use of the area affected by subsidence will only depend on subsequent adaptation to the municipal Master Plan, which is not exempt from possible pressures and economic and business interests.