Archive for the ‘Declaração da ONU sobre Direitos dos Povos Indígenas’ Category

Brazil’s Temer threatens constitutional indigenous land rights

Thursday, August 3rd, 2017

by Sue Branford and Maurício Torres on 1 August 2017

– President Temer, influenced by the rural lobby in congress whose
votes he needs to not be tried by the Supreme Court on corruption charges, has okayed new criteria meant to delegitimize indigenous land boundary claims, legal experts say.

– One rule rejects any indigenous demarcation of land where Indians were not physically present on a traditional territory in 1988, which would disqualify many legitimate claims.

– Another allows government to undertake “strategic” public works, such as dams and roads, without indigenous consent, violating the International Labor Organization’s 169 Convention, signed by Brazil.

– The administration also introduced a bill likely to be passed by congress that reclassifies 349,000 hectares (1,347 square miles) of Jamanxim National Forest in the Amazon, gutting protections, allowing economic activities — logging, ranching, farming and mining — and legitimizing land grabs there.

Hundreds of thousands of Indians live on indigenous lands in Brazil, but much of that land has never been officially demarcated due to decades of government delay. Now, President Temer’s political maneuvering threatens to shut down the demarcation process in favor of land thieves, ranchers, soy growers, mining concerns, and construction companies with much to profit from Amazon dam and road government contracts.

A storm of protest greeted the 19 July announcement that Brazilian President Michel Temer has approved a recommendation made by the Attorney General’s office (AGU), that federal government bodies should adopt new criteria for setting the boundaries of indigenous land.

Respected lawyer Dalmo de Abreu Dallari, who headed the University of São Paulo’s legal faculty for many years, said that the recommendation was a “legal farce,” with the objective of “extorting from the indigenous communities their right to the land they have traditionally occupied.”

But the bancada ruralista rural caucus in Congress is triumphant. Federal deputy Luiz Carlos Heinze, a leading member of the caucus, celebrated the AGU recommendation, saying in a video circulated on social media that it will lead to a reassessment of more than 700 cases, resulting ultimately in the dismissal of 90 percent of ongoing indigenous territory land claims.

The Civil Office of the Presidency has already returned to the justice ministry 19 indigenous territories, covering 792,370 hectares (3,059 square miles), which were close to completion, saying that the recognition of these reserves is to be reviewed. With the process for recognizing many of the other new territories at an early stage, it is impossible to calculate precisely how much land is involved.

However, if created, the new reserves would undoubtedly add millions of hectares to the 177 million hectares (683,400 square miles), 13.8 percent of the Brazilian territory, that is in indigenous hands. By far the largest share — 98 percent of all indigenous territory — is located in the Amazon, where the reserves prove an effective bulwark against deforestation. The long process of recognizing indigenous ownership is not complete in all these territories, so some of these lands could become vulnerable to reclassification.

The “Marco temporal” debate

The most controversial aspect of the AGU’s recommendation is the introduction of the so-called “marco temporal” an arbitrary cut-off date for land claims.

Under the new measure, Indian groups will only have the legal right to claim traditionally held territory that they were physically occupying as of 5 October 1988, the day the most recent federal Constitution was approved — a date, historians point out, by which many Indian groups had already been forced from their lands.

The concept of “marco temporal” was first adopted by the Supreme Federal Court (STF), when it settled a long, contentious dispute over boundaries for the Raposa/Serra do Sol indigenous reserve in Roraima in 2009.

The Dilma Rousseff government, with its strong anti-indigenous bent, was keen to make this cut-off point vinculante, a norm to be universally followed for establishing other indigenous territories in the future, and the AGU issued Portaria 303/2012, an order to that effect. However, STF minister Ricardo Lewandowski, in a 2013 ruling, made it clear that the 19 conditions for such settlements — including the “marco temporal” — could not legally be applied to the demarcation of all indigenous lands. This decision, combined with strong indigenous pressure, led to Portaria 303’s eventual revocation.

The rural elite, however, never accepted the high court’s finding. It wanted the criteria, especially that referring to the “marco temporal,” along with another that forbids the enlargement of indigenous territory already marked out, to become vinculante, the norm and extended to all future cases.

Importantly, the AGU’s July recommendation also makes it possible to undertake “strategic” public works, such as hydroelectric dams and roads, without Indian consent. This seems to be a direct breach of the International Labor Organization’s 169 Convention, signed by Brazil, in which nations commit to full consultation with indigenous people whenever a public work will affect their land or way of life.

Outcry against demarcation rule changes
Protests against the AGU’s recommendation, particularly the 1988 cut-off date, have been vociferous, despite the huge amount of civil strife already unfolding in Brazil — with landless peasants occupying elite estates, including one owned by the family of agriculture minister Blairo Maggi, and with President Temer’s legitimacy threatened by serious corruption charges.

Journalist Rubens Valente, who has just published a book about Brazilian atrocities committed against Indians during the military dictatorship, called Temer’s July decision “a 50-year setback. It’s as if the International Labor Organization’s 169 Convention didn’t exist.”

Well-known forestry consultant Tasso Azevedo, former director of Brazil’s National Forest program under the Lula government, fumed: “Imagine a Polish law that said that the claimant — for example, a Jewish family persecuted during the Second World War — could only get their property back if they were living in the house when it was expropriated? It would be seen as absurd.” He went on: “The AGU recommendation shreds indigenous rights. You want a road? No need to ask. Just go ahead and do it.”

Others point to the tragic predicament of Guarani Indian groups in the state of Mato Grosso do Sul. These indigenous people were forcibly evicted from their territories after the state government sold their land to farmers. For years they’ve struggled to regain their territories and many still squat at roadsides, barred by fences from moving back onto their land. But because they were evicted before 1988, the AGU recommendation would negate all claims.

Crizantho Alves Fialho Neto, from FUNAI, Brazil’s federal indigenous agency, says that the ruling ignores the legal standing of indigenous territory: “Indigenous possession of land is different from a landowner’s ownership of land. It is not possession as defined in civil law. It is possession as defined in the constitution.” In theory at least, this means that indigenous rights are “inviolable, exclusive and perpetual.”

Lawyer José Afonso da Silva, a specialist in constitutional law, also questions the validity of the 1988 cut-off date: “the beginning of the legal recognition of indigenous rights was in June 1611 with the Royal Charter (Carta Régia) promulgated by the Portuguese king Philip lll … All other constitutions continued along these lines. The 1988 Constitution just carried on this tradition.” Based on these legal precedents, he says, there is no reason to give that date a special status — unless, critics say, the government’s plan is to deprive indigenous people of their demarcation rights in order to legitimize land thefts that occurred before that date.

Many other legal experts have protested. Érika Yamada, an independent United Nations indigenous expert, says that the recommendation “exceeds all limits of administrative law, because the president is signing a recommendation that is an attempt to legislate, to alter the 1988 Constitution.” She argues that the new measure is unconstitutional and may well lead to challenges in the ILO, the Organization of American States and the United Nations.

Indigenous organizations have already called for a legal counteroffensive. The Indigenous Council of Roraima (CIR) will be challenging in the courts the legality of actions that replicate the “unconstitutional” conditions established in the Raposa/Serra do Sol case.

These legal challenges may well succeed, but that will take time. Meanwhile, serious damage could be done to indigenous groups. Temer has already said that he expects FUNAI and other government bodies to start implementing the AGU guidance.

The risk of escalating violence
There is another concern: Valente believes that the new criteria could catalyse unrest in the countryside, which is already at record levels: “The Indians want to regain their old lands and they are increasingly well organized.… The AGU recommendation may well provoke violence, as it is telling these groups that the doors are closing for them to get what they want through the justice system or from the executive.” The recommendation could also embolden land grabbers eager to exploit indigenous demarcation disputes, experts say.

Azevedo has no doubt why the president approved the AGU recommendations: “Temer endorsed the ruling for the worst possible motive: to buy political support in Congress so that he won’t be tried for corruption by the Federal Supreme Court.”


Indeed, the rural caucus has made no secret of the role it played in Temer’s rise, and that it could play in his fall. In the already mentioned video, Luiz Carlos Heinze revealed that the AGU recommendation was agreed to in an April meeting between then Justice Minister Osmar Serraglio (a leading member of the rural caucus), Presidential Head of Staff Eliseu Padilha, and Federal Attorney General Grace Maria Fernandes Mendonça. The three made a pact, he claims, that represents “a great advance for all Brazilian [agribusiness] producers who have been feeling frustrated and anxious because of the pressure they have been receiving from FUNAI” to vacate lands they’ve claimed for years.

Experts see the AGU recommendation as just one bargaining chip being used by Temer, an experienced Congressional operator, to make sure he gains sufficient votes in the Lower House to prevent a two-thirds majority from voting that he should be tried by the Supreme Court for the corruption accusation made against him by the Attorney General. That crucial vote is scheduled for this Wednesday. The latest opinion polls show that 81 percent of Brazilians want Temer tried for corruption.

Temer’s environmental concessions
Environmental protection also appears to be an expendable pawn in Temer’s congressional game.

In recent weeks, the president allowed his environmental minister, José Sarney Filho, to introduce a bill to reclassify a large portion of Jamanxim National Forest in the Amazon allowing economic activities within it — including logging, ranching, farming and mining — a dismemberment for which the rural elite has long lobbied, and that would legitimize land grabs underway there for years.

Munduruku (Photo © Rebecca Sommer)

The Munduruku have battled for years with the Brazilian government to get their lands formally demarcated, as have many other indigenous groups. Temer’s actions are likely to make that fight more contentious, with an escalation of violence, as the ruralistas are emboldened to oppose indigenous territory claims. Photo by Rebecca Sommer

Previously, Temer planned to achieve this goal via a provisional measure (MP 756), which he himself proposed, but which in the end, he was forced to veto in the face of intense national and international pressure.

Groups at home and abroad are now campaigning hard to stop the newest Jamanxim dismemberment bill, which would reclassify an even larger part of the forest than the original provisional measure­­ –– 349,000 hectares (1,347 square miles). But this time the counterattack may not be as effective, because bills of this kind only require congressional approval and are not subject to a presidential veto.

The runaway power of the rural caucus in congress and within the Temer administration, and the ruralistas growing confidence that they will not be held accountable, is now having serious consequences for the environment, Indians, quilombolas (those living in communities set up by runaway slaves), peasant farmers and other rural inhabitants.

According to Global Witness, more rural and environmental activists have been killed in Brazil than in any other country in the world over the past five years. Moreover, nine out of ten murders occurred in Legal Amazonia, with most in Rondônia and eastern Pará state. There were 47 total homicides in the Amazon in 2016, with 33 in the first five months of this year, putting 2017 on track to be the bloodiest year in recent Amazon history.

FEEDBACK: Use this form to send a message to the author of this post. If you want to post a public comment, you can do that at the bottom of the page.

Banner image by Agência Brasil and used under Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 Brazil License.

Statement from the family of Arthur Manuel on his passing

Wednesday, January 18th, 2017

Arthur_ManuelOn Wednesday January 11, 2017 at 11:00 PM, Arthur Manuel, our beloved father, grandfather, husband, brother, uncle, warrior, and teacher passed away. Arthur was one of our most determined and outspoken Secwepemc leaders and activists—a pillar in the resistance, known globally for his tireless advocacy for Indigenous Peoples’ right to self-determination. He passed on into the spirit world surrounded by many generations of his loving family.

Arthur was the son of Marceline Paul of the Ktuanaxa Nation and George Manuel of the Secwepemc Nation. George was a political leader and visionary who served as president of the National Indian Brotherhood and the World Council of Indigenous Peoples.

Arthur was born into the struggle and groomed to be a leader and defender of Indigenous rights and title. Coming up as a young leader in the 1970s, he served as president of the National Native Youth Association, leading the occupation of Indian Affairs. He attended Concordia University (Montreal, Quebec) and Osgoode Hall Law School (Toronto, Ontario).

He returned to his community and was elected Chief of Neskonlith Indian Band, Chair of the Shuswap Nation Tribal Council, and Chair of the Assembly of First Nations Delgamuukw Implementation Strategic Committee. He was a long-time co-chair of the North American Indigenous Peoples Caucus of the UN Permanent Forum on Indigenous Issues and former co-chair of the Global caucus. He was active in the Defenders of the Land and Idle No More movement and as a board member of the Seventh Generation Fund for Indigenous Peoples. He was one of the main strategic thinkers of the decolonization movement in Canada. As the spokesman for the Indigenous Network on Economies and Trade, he convinced the World Trade Organization to recognize that Indigenous peoples are subsidizing the BC lumber industry through the non-recognition of Aboriginal title. He was co-author, along with Grand Chief Ronald Derrickson, of the award-winning Unsettling Canada: A National Wake-Up Call, with a foreword by his friend and fellow activist Naomi Klein.

He worked selflessly in defence of Indigenous territorial authority and he fiercely opposed any termination of Indigenous land rights. He rejected provincial and federal authority over unceded Indigenous land, and challenged the extinguishment of Indigenous title through the BC treaty process. He fought climate change, battling the imminent threat of pipelines across Secwepemc territory.

He was a world traveller who connected Indigenous nations across the globe to unite in a common vision and defend their rights. He was gifted a button blanket by the Nuxalk nation and has received countless honours for his work around the world.

Arthur was also a teacher and a mentor to many. He was a source of knowledge for youth and young leaders. Through his fierce love for his people, he shone a light on the path to justice for a new generation of activists.

He’s a residential school survivor, having attended the Kamloops (Kamloops BC), St Eugene’s (Cranbrook BC) and St. Mary’s (Mission BC) residential schools.

Arthur is survived by his life partner, Nicole Schabus, by his sisters Emaline, Martha, Doreen, and Ida, his brothers George, Richard, and Ara, and by his children, Kanahus, Mayuk, Ska7cis and Snutetkwe. He is predeceased by his parents, sister Vera, brother Bobby, beloved son Neskie and his grandchildren Napika Amak and Megenetkwe.

In his most recent article on Canada’s 150th celebration, published only a week before his death, Arthur insisted again that Canada was built entirely on the theft of Indigenous lands.

“Our Indian reserves are only .02% of Canada’s land and yet Indigenous peoples are expected to survive on them. This has led to the systematic impoverishment of Indigenous people and the crippling oppression that indigenous peoples suffer under the current colonial system.

The .02 land based is used to keep us too poor and too weak to fight back. It is used to bribe and co-opt the Indigenous leadership into becoming neocolonial partners to treat the symptom of poverty on Indian reserves without addressing the root cause of the problem, which is the dispossession of all of the Indigenous territory by Canada and the provinces.” – First Nations Strategic Bulletin, August-December 2016 Issue

Wake: Friday, January 13th 5:00 PM and Saturday, January 14th, Adams Lake Indian Band Gymnasium, 6349 Chief Jules Drive, Chase, BC

Funeral Services: Sunday, January 15th 10:00 AM, Adams Lake Indian Band Gymnasium

Media contact: Russell Diabo at 613-296-0110 or rdiabo@rogers.com
Donations to support Arthur’s service can be sent to jacksoncrick7@yahoo.ca
Condolences to the family and photos of Arthur can be sent to erfeltes@gmail.com

DECLARACION DE V CUMBRE ABYA YALA: “DEFENDIENDO EL FUTURO DE NUESTRAS NACIONES”

Thursday, March 19th, 2015

“Del 9 al 11 de abril las organizaciones indigenas realizaran una cumbre indigena paralela a la de los Estados. Adjunto borrador de la declaracion para sus contribuciones” Hector Huertas, coordinador de redacción de la declaracion

 

DECLARACION DE V CUMBRE ABYA YALA: “DEFENDIENDO EL FUTURO DE NUESTRAS NACIONES”

 

Nosotros, los representantes de los Pueblos y Naciones indígenas de Abya Yala de las regiones de Sudamérica, Centroamérica, Norteamérica y el Caribe, en el ejercicio del derecho a la libre determinación y en defensa de la Madre Tierra, hacemos de conocimiento de los Estados nuestra posición frente a la VII cumbre de Jefes de Estados y Gobierno de las Américas a celebrarse en Panamá del 9 al 10 de abril de 2015.

 

 

CONSIDERANDO

 

Que nosotros los Pueblos y Naciones indígenas originarias de Abya Yala, teniendo como base la Declaración de las Naciones Unidas sobre los Derechos de los Pueblos Indígenas (2007), La resolución 1514 (XV) de la Asamblea General de las Naciones Unidas el 14 de diciembre de 1960 (Numeral 1 de la Declaración sobre la Concesión de la Independencia a los Países y Pueblos Coloniales); el convenio 169 de la OIT (1989); La Declaración de Viena 2003, la Convención sobre la Eliminación de todas las formas de Discriminación Racial y el Documento final de la reunión plenaria de alto nivel de la Asamblea General de la ONU, Conferencia Mundial sobre los Pueblos Indígenas y otros instrumentos Internacionales relacionados a pueblos indígenas y el ambiente.

 

Que a través de estos instrumentos internacionales, los Estados de las Américas, se han obligado adoptar decisiones de carácter legislativo, administrativo y judicial, para la erradicación de la desigualdad, no discriminación, y la exclusión histórica de los Pueblos Indígenas reconociendo la dignidad inherente y nuestra contribución desarrollo, en especial de la mujer indígena.

Que en las Seis Cumbres de las Américas y sus sesiones extraordinarias los jefes de Estado y de los gobiernos de la región han aprobado compromisos a través de la adopción de declaraciones y planes de acciones, para igualmente erradicar la exclusión, desigualdad, el respeto a los derechos humanos, la consolidación de la democracia, libre comercio, la adopción de la carta democrática, empleo, prosperidad humana, seguridad energética, sostenibilidad ambiental, integración de las Américas, pobreza, desigualdad y seguridad ciudadana que alcanza la situación de los Pueblos Indígenas.

Que a pesar de la existencia de todos los instrumentos y legislaciones internacionales existentes prevalece y recrudece la pobreza, marginación y exclusión de los Pueblos Indígenas en las Américas.

Los Pueblos y Naciones Indígenas llamamos, la atención a los Estados a establecer compromisos serios de corto plazo a fin de cumplir con el mandato internacional por lo que proponen las siguientes Acciones y Compromisos ante los Jefes de Estados y de gobiernos:

Que en las actuales negociaciones de la Declaración Americana sobre los derechos de los Pueblos Indígenas existe un marcado desinterés de parte de los Estados de no contribuir con el fondo de contribuciones voluntarias para apoyar la participación plena y efectiva de los representantes indígenas de las Américas, y los obstáculos a no querer aprobar una declaración fuerte por arriba de los estándares de la declaración de la ONU.

COMPROMISOS

1.     Que los Jefes de Estado y Ministros de Estados se comprometan a financiar el fondo de contribuciones voluntarias para permitir la participación indígenas en el Grupo de Trabajo que prepara la Declaración Americana sobre los derechos de los Pueblos Indígenas y su compromiso a adoptar una declaración fuerte y no por debajo de los estándares de la DNUDPI.

2.     Los pueblos y naciones indígenas pedimos a todos los Estados, se hagan las reformas constitucionales para desmantelar la doctrina del Res Nullius del sistema jurídico, la propiedad del Estado sobre los recursos del suelo y subsuelo en detrimento de los derechos de los Pueblos Indígenas, implementar con carácter de prioridad los derechos establecidos en la declaración de los derechos de los Pueblos Indígenas adoptado por la Asamblea General de la Organización de las Naciones Unidas.   Solicitamos se establezca un comité de expertos independientes designados por la Asamblea General cuyo mandato es la verificación de la implementación de la Declaración sobre los derechos de los Pueblos Indígenas de la ONU.

3.     Se impulse el derecho a la libre determinación de los Pueblos Indígenas, en ese sentido se desarrollen los regímenes autónomos necesarios que le permitan a los Pueblos Indígenas, ser los sujetos del desarrollo, la democracia y la gobernanza sobre sus tierras, territorios y recursos naturales.

4.     Se implemente, el Buen Vivir como derecho humano y principio rector de las políticas públicas de los Estados en los proyectos y planes de desarrollo económico y social que impulsen.

5.     Se implemente los derechos colectivos sobre las tierras, territorios y recursos de los Pueblos Indígenas, el carácter colectivo, inalienable e inadjudicable de los mismos a fin de garantizar la pervivencia de los Pueblos Indígenas en los Estados y en particular a los Pueblos Indígenas no contactados.

6.     Que el derecho al consentimiento previo libre e informado sea desarrollado en la mayoría de los Estados no como un mero trámite para obligar a los Pueblos Indígenas a dar su consentimiento, si no para garantizar el respeto a nuestros derechos humanos, desarrollando los mandatos de la declaración de la ONU en esta materia.

7.     Los Estados deben insertar en todos sus procesos educativos el aporte de los Pueblos Indígenas en la historia, ciencias, artes, filosofía e identidad de Abya Yala e impulsando la educación intercultural en todos los niveles a fin de reflejar la identidad cultural de las naciones, garantizando su participación activa en el proceso, acorde a su cultura, tradiciones e identidad, mediante acciones afirmativas. La Comisión Interamericana de Educación observar el cumplimiento de este mandato hasta que se elimine el racismo, en los textos escolares y en los sistemas de educación. La educación intercultural será una prioridad de los programas de educación.

  1. Los Estados deben en sus programas de salud insertar la visión colectiva holística de la salud indígena, evitar proyectos que comprometan la salud colectiva de los indígenas, reconociendo su medicina tradicional y protegiendo sus recursos y conocimientos de la piratería. Los programas de salud de carácter universal deben insertar la visión holística tanto como colectiva como individual de los Pueblos Indígenas de modo que no se pueden aprobar proyectos de desarrollo en territorios indígenas que afectan la salud indígena de modo que se genere equidad. Por otro lado, en ejercicio a la libre determinación los sistemas de salud tradicional de los Pueblos Indígenas deben formar parte de la estrategia de desarrollo.

 

  1. Se debe adoptar en corto plazo el desarrollo energético propio de los Pueblos Indígenas a través del financiamiento de estas iniciativas a fin de que la energía alternativa llegue a nuestras comunidades. Las instituciones financieras deben condicionar el financiamiento de proyectos energéticos al respeto de los derechos de los Pueblos Indígenas y la participación de los beneficios se deben adecuar antes los marcos legales de carácter nacional y regional.

 

  1. Reconociendo las graves consecuencias del cambio climático y que dicho fenómeno es producto de la utilización indiscriminada de los recursos de la madre tierra por los países industrializados los Estados deben exigir a los países responsables a reducir sus emisiones y no pretender usar los recursos de los Pueblos Indígenas como excusas para no cumplir con sus obligaciones internacionales. Rechazamos, los proyectos que tiene como justificación atacar el cambio climático que afectan las tierras, territorios y recursos de los Pueblos Indígenas.

 

ACCIONES

 

  1. Solicitar a la reunión de Ministros y Altas Autoridades de Desarrollo Sostenible de la OEA que exija el cumplimiento e implementación de la DNUDPI a los Estados miembros de la Conferencia de las Partes de la Convención Marco de las Naciones Unidas sobre el Cambio Climático (COP 20) en todas las medidas que afecten a los Pueblos Indígenas.

 

  1. Que los Estados se obligan a financiar las medidas de adaptación al cambio climático para los sectores más vulnerables, en especial los Pueblos Indígenas y cuantificar los impactos económicos del cambio climático de manera desagregada sobre sectores clave para los países de la región, como las tierras y territorios indígenas, la agricultura, los recursos hídricos, los asentamientos humanos, las zonas costeras, la biodiversidad, la salud entre otros. En este contexto, prestar especial atención a las políticas y acciones relacionadas con la mitigación y la adaptación del cambio climático presentadas o realizadas por los Pueblos Indígenas.

 

  1. Apoyar los procesos de planificación, ordenamiento territorial y titulación de los territorios indígenas que se realizan a nivel nacional y sub nacional incorporen de manera prioritaria la prevención y mitigación de riesgos ambientales. Asimismo, a través de inversiones y políticas promover un desarrollo sostenible. Encomendar a las instituciones financieras y a la OEA que apoyen este esfuerzo.

 

  1. En el marco de la declaración de la naciones unidas sobre los derechos de los Pueblos Indígenas y el Convenio sobre los derechos de los trabajadores migrantes y sus familias aprobado por la Asamblea General en su resolución 45/158, de 18 de diciembre de 1990, y entró en vigor el 1º de julio de 2003, se debe tomar en consideración la situación de los indígenas migrantes. El Grupo de Trabajo migrantes en Conjunto de las Cumbres (GTCC), particularmente a los representantes de los Pueblos Indígenas e Instituciones Financieras, que continúen apoyando los esfuerzos de los países para crear las condiciones económicas y sociales para generar más y mejores oportunidades que permitan el desarrollo y el arraigo de la población en sus países. En particular, los desarrollar programas en las regiones de fronteras a fin de regularizar la situación de indígenas migrantes y transfronterizos y el desarrollo de las capacidades propias del territorio de modo que puedan satisfacer sus derechos humanos.

 

  1. Reconociendo que el desarrollo integral y equitativo contribuye a crear condiciones de seguridad y que a su vez mejores condiciones de seguridad propician mayor prosperidad, solicitamos las siguientes acciones:
  • Se deben reconocer los mecanismos propios de seguridad de los Pueblos Indígenas
  • Se debe prohibir la militarización de los territorios indígenas
  • Se debe apoyar a los Pueblos Indígenas en la lucha contra el tráfico de drogas.

 

  1. Desarrollar esfuerzos especiales dirigidos a reducir la violencia en contra de la mujer, particularmente a través de implementación de políticas públicas eficaces, de capacitación de funcionarios y la recolección de datos e información estadística, particularmente en el marco de la Convención Interamericana para Prevenir, Sancionar y Erradicar la Violencia Contra la Mujer (Convención de Belem do Para). Encomendamos a la OEA, a través de la Comisión Interamericana de Mujeres que continúe sus esfuerzos en este ámbito, especialmente a través del fortalecimiento del mecanismo de seguimiento de la Convención.

 

  1. Crear, sin restricciones ni limitaciones de participación, el Foro Interamericano de los Pueblos Indígenas, de tal forma que haya un proceso continuo de participación y consulta con los representantes de los Pueblos Indígenas y no solamente en la época previa a la celebración de una Cumbre de las Américas. Encomendamos a la OEA que establezca y gestione el Foro.

 

  1. Implementar la participación plena y efectiva de los Pueblos Indígenas, particularmente a través del uso de la tecnología y soluciones digitales. En función de ello, promover el gobierno abierto y el derecho a la información como herramientas claves para lograr mayor transparencia e inclusión.

 

  1. Fortalecer el Estado de Derecho Democrático, la separación e independencia entre los Poderes del Estado, la libre determinación y autonomías de los Pueblos Indígenas, el respeto a los derechos humanos, la transparencia, integridad y eficiencia de la gestión pública, así como la creación de condiciones que hagan posible la implementación de la declaración de la ONU en la participación plena y efectiva en todo el ciclo de las políticas públicas, principalmente mediante la democratización del acceso a las tecnologías de la información y la comunicación. Encomendamos a la OEA que le dé seguimiento a este tema.

 

  1. Promover el derecho a la participación plena y efectiva de los Pueblos Indígenas de acuerdo a sus formas de representación en las contiendas electorales.  Financiar las autonomías indígenas como una forma de fortalecer la democracia.

 

  1. La situación de las mujeres indígenas y los niños indígenas es alarmante en las Américas, se propone realizar acciones urgentes con la participación de los pueblos indígenas para promover el respeto de los derechos de las mujeres, jóvenes y niños, niñas indigenas.

 

  1. Promover y visibilizar la participación de las mujeres indígenas en la agenda política nacional de género, en los programas de salud y educación como protagonistas generadoras de cultura.   Promover acciones educativas concretas dirigidas insertar a la mujer indígena en el ámbito laboral acorde con su realidad sociocultural.

 

  1. Fortalecer los programas nacionales en donde los haya y donde no crearlas para atender la seguridad alimentaria, y la atención primaria de los niños y juventud indígena en su integridad física, como psicológica. Promover el empleo de la juventud indígena.

 

  1. Los Pueblos Indígenas son los más marginados en el derecho de acceso a la información y comunicación, muchos proyectos de desarrollos o decisiones administrativas se toman sin la debida información a las comunidades indígenas, la participación es uno de los pilares para la democracia , no se puede participar si no se sabe o estaba debidamente informado: Proponemos

 

  • El desarrollo urgente de programas de acceso a la información y comunicación en el idioma de los Estados y los idiomas indígenas

 

  • Se debe fortalecer en los programas de desarrollo de redes comunitarias en lengua indígena que permitan el acceso a la información

 

  • Se deben desarrollar programas que permitan a los Pueblos indígenas a tener acceso a tecnología de la información.

 

Dado el 10 y 11 de abril de 2015, en la ciudad de Panamá.

 

Docip VIDEO: Bridge to the Future / Un Puente al Futuro / Un pont vers l’avenir / МОСТ В БУДУЩЕЕ

Sunday, February 1st, 2015

Published on youtube May 6, 2014 by DOCIP
VIDEO: Bridge to the Future / Un Puente al Futuro / Un pont vers l’avenir / МОСТ В БУДУЩЕЕ

Indigenous Youth document the achievements of the First Indigenous Peoples’ delegates at the United Nations / La juventud indígena documenta los logros de los primeros delegados de los Pueblos Indígenas en las Naciones Unidas / La jeunesse autochtone documente les succès des premiers délégués des peuples autochtones à l’ONU / Молодежь из числа коренного населения запечатляет достижения первых делегатов от коренных народов в Организации Объединенных Наций

Indígenas bloqueiam BR que liga o estado de Roraima a Venezuela contra a PEC 215

Sunday, December 21st, 2014

Cerca de 1000 indígenas bloquearam na manhã de hoje, 17, de dezembro, a BR- 174 que liga o estado de Roraima a Venezuela em protesto contra a PEC 215. A manifestação é pacífica e os indígenas do estado de Roraima exigem o arquivamento da medida legislativa.

Neste clima de intranquilidade, os povos indígenas clamam por justiça e pedem pela garantia dos direitos previstos na Constituição Federal. Os povos afirmam que a PEC 215 é inconstitucional e infringe direitos previstos na lei.

Entenda a PEC 215

A Proposta de Emenda Constitucional (PEC 215/2000) é de autoria do ex-deputado federal Almir Sá (RR) que, “acrescenta o inciso XVIII ao art. 49; modifica o § 4º e acrescenta o § 8º ambos no art. 231, da Constituição Federal” para incluir dentre as competências exclusivas do Congresso Nacional a aprovação de demarcação das terras tradicionalmente ocupadas pelos índios e a ratificação das demarcações já homologadas; e para estabelecer critérios e procedimentos de demarcação serão regulamentados por lei”.

No momento, a discussão da PEC 215 está na Comissão Especial da Câmara dos Deputados criada na apresentar parecer. A Comissão é formada na sua maioria por deputados ligados a bancada ruralista que apoiam a PEC 215 e tentam aprovar um Relatório Substitutivo.

O novo parecer além de corroborar o texto original, inclui as piores e inconstitucionais condicionantes do Caso da Raposa Serra do Sol estabelecida pelo Supremo Tribunal Federal (STF). Tais condicionantes foram consideradas pelos ministros do STF como não vinculantes, portanto, não devem se estender a outras terras, mesmo assim a bancada ruralista tenta incorporar no texto da PEC 215.

Além disso, segundo informações publicadas em jornais e pelo Ministério Público Federal, o Relatório Substitutivo a ser discutido teria sido produzido fora da Comissão Especial, por advogado ligado ao CNA pago para atender os interesses individuais dos ruralistas envolvidos em invasão em terras indígenas no Mato Grosso do Sul.

A PEC 215 afronta seriamente os direitos constitucionais. Coloca em risco a sobrevivência física e cultural dos povos indígenas que dependem de suas terras. Somado a isso, contraria os princípios de separação de poderes ao propor transferir para o Congresso Nacional responsabilidades administrativas do governo federal, com absurda interferência clara da bancada ruralista. E o mais grave, os povos indígenas deixados de fora, do processo e das discussões, sem consultas e sem direito de entrar, falar ou defender na casa, considerado do povo, o Congresso Nacional.

As lideranças indígenas de diversas partes do estado de Roraima permanecem na manifestação divulgando suas preocupações e alertando autoridades e a sociedade brasileira sobre o risco de seus direitos.

Conselho Indígena de Roraima

17 de dezembro de 2014

Panel finds corporations, United Nations and governments guilty of violating nature’s rights

Saturday, December 13th, 2014

By Indigenous Environmental Network.

Lima, Peru (Dec. 7, 2014)– The International Tribunal for the Rights of Nature judged twelve international and domestic cases; examining the violation of the rights of peoples and nature committed by corporations, The United Nations, and governmental entities. The judgments reference the legal framework of the Rights of Nature and the Universal Declaration of the Rights of Mother Earth. The cases were reviewed on Dec. 5th and 6th in Lima’s Gran Hotel Bolivar.

According to Alberto Acosta, president of the Tribunal and former president of the Constitutional Assembly of Ecuador, the rights of nature must have a universal validity. “This ethical tribunal arises when States fail to fulfill their obligation to preserve the lives of living beings,” said Acosta. “As long as nature is seen as property in law, there can be no justice for communities, the climate or nature.”

Acosta led the 13 judges through 12 cases

The Tribunal was dedicated to Shuar leader, José Tendentza, who was found murdered just days before the Tribunal. Tendentza of Southern Ecuador was scheduled to present the Condor Mine case. Acosta led the 13 judges through 12 cases that were determined by the judges to demonstrate egregious violations to rights of nature and human rights. Cases included:

-False Solutions related to Climate Change and REDD+;
-Peruvian cases: Conga Mine, Bagua Massacre – Defenders of Earth, 4 River Basins of Peru;
-Ecuadorian cases: Condor Mine, Chevron/Texaco, and Yasuni ITT
Brazil: Belo Monte Dam
-USA and Bolivia: Hydraulic fracturing “fracking”
-Oceans: BP Gulf of Mexico Oil Spill, coal mine and other threats to Australia’s Great Barrier Reef

Of the cases, the oil exploitation of the Yasuni territory of Ecuador was condemned in addition to the relentless persecution Yasunidos are facing for their dissent. Since 2013, the Ecuadorian government green-lighted oil drilling in Yasuni National Park, one of the most biodiverse areas in the world and home to two indigenous nations in voluntary isolation.

In protest, a group of young Yasunidos joined together to claim the rights of nature, which are guaranteed in the Constitution of Ecuador. They collected more than 800,000 signatures to call for a referendum on the oil exploitation, but their request was rejected by electoral institutions. The Yasunidos are now suing the Ecuadorian government, led by President Rafael Correa, and are waiting for their complaint to be reviewed by the tribunal of the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights (CIDH).

Additionally, the Tribunal for the Rights of Nature found Chevron-Texaco in Ecuador to be guilty of using inappropriate technology and causing irreversible damage to the environment. They determined that the corporation must fully compensate those affected by the environmental impact.

The Peruvian cases of Conga and Bagua were accepted as threats of violation to the rights of nature. An international special commission was appointed to visit the impacted Amazonian basins to collect more information on the contamination.

The case of the mining project in the Cordillera del Condor was found by the Tribunal to be in direct violation of the rights of nature. They determined that mining must be suspended and those affected must be compensated. They urge the state to investigate and punish those responsible for the death of José Tendentza, the prominent social activist that was in opposition to the mining.

A widow of one of the four murdered activists shares her testimony

The Peruvian cases of Conga and Bagua were accepted as threats of violation to the rights of nature. An international special commission was appointed to visit the impacted Amazonian basins to collect more information on the contamination.

Shannon Biggs, director of Movement Rights, shared testimony on the impacts of fracking , a process of extracting natural gas from shale rock layers deep within the earth. “You cannot do safe fracking,” said Biggs. “This technique should have never been invented. It is one of the most destructive activities against the environment ever seen.”

According to Biggs, 800,000 active oil and gas wells are being fracked in the United States, producing roughly 300,000 natural gas barrels per day. Severe water pollution and earthquakes have been linked with fracking. “We die from fracking. The population is suffering from cancer; my sister has died,” said Casey Camp-Horinek (Ponca) of Oklahoma in her testimony. “The water is contaminated; we cannot fish. We are in danger of extinction.”

Plans to develop large-scale hydraulic fracking in Bolivia were reported by Martin Vilela of Platform Climate Reaction. In recent years the country has increased the production and export of natural gas. 82.4% of its production is exported, generating more than six billion dollars a year. Bolivia has 8.23 trillion cubic feet of gas, and YPFB plans to invest over 40 million dollars between 2013 and 2015. Vilela explained that in 2013 this corporation signed an agreement for fracking in the Chaco area, a region with water scarcity to extract 48 trillion cubic feet of shale gas. Estimates determine that this would consume between 112 and 335 billion liters of water.

Nnimmo Bassey, a Nigerian architect, environmental activist presented on the contamination and temperature rise affecting Nigeria. According to Bassey, oil fields and pipelines have caused deep environmental degradation, deforestation, and countless oil spills. Life expectancy in these impacted areas is 44 years.

Bassey warned that climate change will have catastrophic consequences. “For every degree the temperature rises globally, in Africa it will rise an additional 50%.” In 2012 floods in Nigeria led to the relocation of 6 million inhabitants. Bassey speculates that in 2030 Africa violent conflicts will increase by 54% due to the lack of access to natural resources.

At the hearing on “false climate solutions,” geoengineering techniques that seek to manipulate climate without changing the conditions that cause climate change were reviewed.

REDD+ was also put on trial. President of the Huni Kui people of Acre, Brazil, Ninawa Kaxinawá (Hunikui) testified that “REDD is a lie. We do not accept putting nature on market because it is our soul and spirit; it is priceless, it is our voice.”

According to Ruth Nyambura, of the Biodiversity Network Africa, says that in Kenya, evictions are occurring as a result of REDD. “Four indigenous people were arrested,” said Nyambura. “A woman was hit by the forest service because she was outside of her land.”

The Tribunal is calling for a special hearing in Paris in 2015 to coincide with the upcoming UN COP 21 summit.

Justiça Federal suspende o licenciamento da mineradora canadense Belo Sun no Xingu

Friday, November 22nd, 2013

Atendendo a pedido feito pelo MPF na semana passada, o juiz federal de Altamira obrigou a mineradora a fazer os estudos de impactos sobre os indígenas

20/11/2013 às 15h07A Justiça Federal em Altamira suspendeu o licenciamento ambiental do projeto Volta Grande de Mineração, que a mineradora canadense Belo Sun pretendia instalar na mesma região onde está sendo construída a hidrelétrica de Belo Monte, no rio Xingu, no Pará. A decisão atende a pedido do Ministério Público Federal (MPF) e obriga a empresa a fazer os estudos de impacto sobre os indígenas da região, que são exigidos por lei e até agora não foram apresentados.

“A condução do licenciamento ambiental sem a necessária e prévia análise do componente indígena demonstra grave violação à legislação ambiental e aos direitos indígenas”, diz a decisão judicial. A liminar determina a suspensão do licenciamento e a anulação, caso seja expedida, de licença prévia à Belo Sun, “condicionando o licenciamento à elaboração do Estudo de Impacto Ambiental e respectivo Relatório de Impacto sobre o Meio Ambiente do Projeto Volta Grande de Mineração contemplando o componente indígena, devendo ainda seguir as orientações contidas no Termo de Referência elaborado pela Fundação Nacional do Índio (Funai)”.

Em caso de descumprimento da decisão, o juiz Sérgio Wolney Guedes determinou multa diária de R$ 20 mil. A Secretaria de Meio Ambiente (Sema) do Pará já se pronunciou favorável a emitir a licença para  o empreendimento sem exigir os estudos e chegou a colocar o assunto em votação na reunião do Conselho Estadual do Meio Ambiente (Coema) do último dia 18 de novembro. A representante do Ministério Público do Estado do Pará (MP), Eliane Moreira, pediu vistas do processo e o assunto deveria voltar à pauta no próximo dia 2 de dezembro. Com a decisão judicial, a concessão de qualquer licença para a Belo Sun no Conselho está proibida.

O projeto Volta Grande de mineração foi anunciado pelos empreendedores como o maior do Brasil. O plano é instalar a mina em Senador José Porfírio, a aproximadamente 10 km de distância da barragem de Belo Monte. A empresa Belo Sun, do grupo canadense Forbes&Manhattan, divulgou aos investidores que extrairá, em 12 anos, 50 toneladas de ouro com um faturamento de R$ 550 milhões por ano. Essa semana, após a reunião do Coema, a Belo Sun emitiu um comunicado em seu site informando aos acionistas que já obtivera votos de 11 dos 13 conselheiros (veja o comunicado aqui, em inglês)

Para o MPF, conceder licença para mais um empreendimento de grave impacto sem conhecer os impactos aos indígenas é inadmissível, já que as populações da Volta Grande do Xingu são justamente as que sofrerão o pior impacto da usina de Belo Monte, que é o desvio de 80% a 90% da água do Xingu para movimentar as turbinas. É um dano tão severo que o próprio Instituto Brasileiro de Meio Ambiente (Ibama) ao conceder a licença para a hidrelétrica estabeleceu um período de seis anos de testes para saber se a Volta Grande e as populações terão capacidade de sobreviver à construção da barragem e à seca permanente.

O juiz federal Sérgio Wolney Guedes concorda com a necessidade de precaução e afirma em sua decisão que, “em se tratando de direito ambiental, a tutela não se dirige apenas a casos de ocorrência efetiva do dano, pelo contrário, busca-se justamente proteger o meio ambiente da iminência ou probabilidade de dano, evitando-se que ele venha a ocorrer, pois o dano ambiental é, como regra, irreversível”

Para o MPF, ao ignorar todas as recomendações, advertências e preocupações, ao desconhecer os impactos de Belo Monte e permitir que os estudos indígenas sejam apresentados depois da concessão da licença prévia, a Sema estaria cometendo diversas ilegalidades e impondo “aos indígenas duplamente afetados (por Belo Monte e agora por Belo Sun) o ônus que deveria ser do empreendedor, de arcar com as externalidades negativas do empreendimento”.

MPF entra na Justiça para suspender licenciamento de mineradora no Xingu

Friday, November 22nd, 2013

O Ministério Público Federal (MPF) ajuizou hoje em Altamira ação judicial pedindo a suspensão imediata do licenciamento ambiental da mina de ouro que a mineradora canadense Belo Sun quer instalar na mesma região do rio Xingu onde está sendo construída a hidrelétrica de Belo Monte.

O licenciamento é irregular porque está sendo conduzido sem exigência dos estudos de impacto sobre os indígenas que moram na área. O MPF já havia recomendado que fossem feitos os estudos. A Fundação Nacional do Índio (Funai) chegou a pedir a suspensão do empreendimento. E mesmo assim, a Secretaria de Meio Ambiente do Pará (Sema) anunciou a inclusão da licença na pauta da próxima reunião do Conselho Estadual de Meio Ambiente (Coema), na próxima segunda-feira (18/11).

A Funai emitiu, em dezembro de 2012, um Termo de Referência (com as questões a serem respondidas pelos Estudos) para que a Belo Sun fizesse as pesquisas necessárias sobre os impactos aos indígenas Juruna, Arara e isolados que residem na Volta Grande do Xingu. Até agora os estudos não foram apresentados. Para o MPF, os estudos não foram realizados por absoluta negligência da Sema. A Belo Sun alega que não havia uma parte do termo de referência que trata dos índios isolados, mas depois de um ano da emissão dele, ainda não tinha enviado sequer requerimento à Funai para entrar nas terras Arara e Paquiçamba, que já tinham diretrizes de estudos.

Advertida pelo MPF de que é ilegal a emissão de licença prévia para a mineração sem conhecer os impactos sobre os índios, a Sema disse que não pode “penalizar o empreendedor” e que a licença para a Belo Sun está amparada na “concepção da função social da atividade minerária”. O Projeto Volta Grande de Mineração é de responsabilidade da empresa Belo Sun Mineração Ltda., subsidiária brasileira da Belo Sun Mining Corporation, pertencente ao grupo Forbes & Manhattan Inc., um banco mercantil de capital privado, que desenvolve projetos de mineração em todo o mundo.

“É absolutamente irresponsável a atitude do órgão licenciador, de impor ao licenciamento o ritmo do mercado em benefício do empreendedor, vitimando de maneira quiçá irreversível povos indígenas na Volta Grande do Xingu, que terão de arcar com um risco que, por lei, deve ser evitado”, dizem os procuradores Thais Santi, Bruna Azevedo, Ubiratan Cazetta e Felício Pontes Jr.

Os indígenas que vivem nesse trecho de 100 km do Xingu vão sofrer o mais grave e definitivo impacto provocado por Belo Monte, que é a redução da quantidade de água no rio em 80% a 90%. O impacto é tão severo que o próprio Instituto Brasileiro de Meio Ambiente (Ibama) ao conceder a licença para a usina estabeleceu um período de seis anos de testes para saber se a Volta Grande e as populações terão capacidade de sobreviver à construção da barragem e à seca permanente.

A Funai chegou a informar a Sema que em virtude dos riscos socioambientais de Belo Monte a licença da Belo Sun só poderia ser emitida após esse período de monitoramento. A própria Norte Energia S.A, responsável pelas obras de Belo Monte, enviou documento ao MPF pedindo atuação e expressando preocupação com a sinergia entre os dois empreendimentos. Os índios Juruna da aldeia Yudjá Muratu também pediram ao MPF que intervisse para garantir-lhes o direito à Consulta Prévia, Livre e Informada prevista na Convenção 169 da Organização Internacional do Trabalho (OIT).

Para o MPF, ao ignorar todas as recomendações, advertências e preocupações, ao desconhecer os impactos de Belo Monte e permitir que os estudos indígenas sejam apresentados depois da concessão da licença prévia, a Sema está cometendo diversas ilegalidades e impondo “aos indígenas duplamente afetados (por Belo Monte e agora por Belo Sun) o ônus que deveria ser do empreendedor, de arcar com as externalidades negativas do empreendimento”.

A afirmação da Sema de que vai emitir licença sem exigir estudos do componente indígena, para o MPF, viola o princípio constitucional da precaução, ofende as normas do licenciamento ambiental e configura negligência do licenciador. Ao deixar para a próxima etapa do licenciamento os estudos de impacto sobre os indígenas, a Sema transforma em condicionante o que é na verdade uma condição de viabilidade do empreendimento, o que não está previsto na ordem jurídica brasileira.

A Sema se escuda em uma portaria interministerial (419/2011) que prevê que impactos de empreendimentos minerários serão obrigatoriamente considerados se estiverem localizados até 10 km de distância de uma terra indígena. Não há consenso quanto à distância exata da mina da Belo Sun em relação à Terra Indígena Paquiçamba, a mais próxima. “O licenciador fala em 10,7 Km; o Instituto Socioambiental afirma que a distância é de 9,6 Km; os indígenas da aldeia Muratu reafirmam a distância de 9,6 Km; a FUNAI afirma a distância é de 12Km e o empreendedor reafirma que a distância é de 12 Km. Dessa controvérsia, a única certeza que resta é a necessidade da precaução.”, diz o MPF.

Tanto é assim que, no caso da Belo Sun, narra a ação, “o órgão indigenista tomou conhecimento do projeto por outros meios, compareceu espontaneamente ao processo de licenciamento e manifestou com veemência a necessidade de estudos prévios sobre os povos indígenas afetados para o atestado de viabilidade do empreendimento”. Para o MPF, “ao insistir na portaria interministerial mesmo diante da manifestação do órgão indigenista, a negligência do licenciador se redefine como opção ardilosa de impor ao processo de licenciamento ambiental o ritmo do mercado de ações do empreendedor”.

Processo nº 0002505-70.2013.4.01.3903

EARTH PEOPLES Solidaritätskundgebung in Berlin zur Aktionswoche der indigenen Völker Brasiliens

Tuesday, October 1st, 2013

Solidaritätskundgebung zur Aktionswoche der indigenen Völker Brasiliens

Ohne Land kein Leben

Berlin 30. September 2013. Heute veranstalten AktivistInnen von Earth Peoples, FIAN, Rettet den Regenwald, FDCL, Gegenströmung und engagierte BrasilianerInnen vor der brasilianischen Botschaft in Berlin eine Solidaritätskundgebung zur Aktionswoche der indigenen Völker Brasiliens. Die Assoziation der Indigenen Völker Brasiliens (APIB) ruft anlässlich des 25-jährigen Bestehens der brasilianischen Verfassung zur Verteidigung der in der Verfassung festgeschriebenen Landrechte für indigene Völker und traditionelle Gemeinschaften auf.

Photo © Rebecca Sommer

Photo © Rebecca Sommer

Die genannten Organisationen in Berlin tragen die Forderungen der Indigenen Brasiliens mit Großpuppen, Fotos und Transparenten vor die brasilianische Botschaft in Berlin..

Die brasilianische Verfassung von 1988 legte einen Zeitraum von 5 Jahren fest, um die Demarkierung und den Schutz indigener Gebiete sicherzustellen. Diese Frist ist vor 20 Jahren abgelaufen. Viele indigene Völker leiden aber bis heute darunter, dass ihnen ihre Landrechte verwehrt werden, so z.B. die Guarani-Kaiowá in Mato Grosso do Sul, die ein marginalisiertes Leben in Reservaten oder in Lagern am Rande der Bundesstraßen führen müssen, oder die vom umstrittenen Belo Monte-Staudamm betroffenen Gruppen.

Die aktuelle brasilianische Regierung unter Dilma Rousseff verschleppt den Demarkierungs­prozess; zudem sind zahlreiche Maßnahmen in der parlamentarischen Diskussion, die die Durchsetzung der Rechte auf traditionelles Land erheblich erschweren würden, etwa der geplante Verfassungszusatz PEC 215. Nach diesem Vorschlag würde die Entscheidung über die Einrichtung eines indigenen Gebietes von der Präsidentin auf das Parlament übergehen. Dieser Vorschlag stellt einen gravierenden Rückschritt im Kampf um traditionelle Landrechte dar, da die großen Agrarproduzenten im Parlament stark vertreten sind, es dort aber keine Vertreter der Indigenen gibt, die ihre Rechte und Interessen direkt vertreten könnten.

Besonders stark ausgeprägt sind die Konflikte um indigenes Land im Bundesstaat Mato Grosso do Sul, wo neben Rinderhaltung in großem Stil Sojaanbau für die Futtermittelindustrie und Zuckerrohranbau für die Produktion von Agrartreibstoffen betrieben wird.

„Das geplante Gesetz PL 1.610 sieht die Möglichkeit des Bergbaus auf indigenem Gebiet auch ohne Zustimmung der Indigenen vor. Der Run auf Ressourcen bedroht durch die PL 1.610 152 indigene Territorien, einige von diesen indigenen Ländereien gar zu 96 Prozent. Zudem plant Brasiliens Regierung in den kommenden zehn Jahren mehr als 40 weitere Großstaudämme allein in Amazonien. Unter dem Deckmantel vermeintlich »grüner« Energie geraten die indigenen Territorien so weiter unter Druck.


PROTEST IN BRASILIEN: 30. September bis 5. Oktober 2013:Nationale Mobilisierung in Verteidigung der Carta Magna, der Indigenenrechte und von Mutter Natur

Tuesday, October 1st, 2013
Nationale Mobilisierung in Verteidigung der Carta Magna, der Indigenenrechte und von Mutter Natur
Der Zusammenschluss der Indigenen Völker Brasiliens (APIB), der sich zusammensetzt aus der Koordinationsgruppe der Indigenen Organisationen der Brasilianischen Amazonasregion (COIAB), dem Zusammenschluss der Indigenen Völker und Organisationen des Nordostens, von Minas Gerais und Espírito Santo (APOINME), dem Zusammenschluss der Indigenen Völker des Südens (Arpinsul), dem Zusammenschluss der Indigenen Völker des Südostens (ARPINSUDESTE), dem Rat der Indigenen Völker von Mato Grosso do Sul und der Großen Versammlung des Volkes der Guarani (ATY GUASU), die jeweils an ihrer Basis Hunderte von indigenen Gruppen und Gemeinschaften versammeln; vor dem folgenden Hintergrund:
Dass die traditionellen Rechte und Territorien der indigenen Völker, der Quilombolas und die anderer traditioneller Bevölkerungsgruppen sich starken Angriffen von Seiten einflussreicher wirtschaftlicher Interessengruppen ausgesetzt sehen. Diese Gruppen verteidigen ihr Recht auf Eigentum, aber sie respektieren unsere kollektiven Rechte auf unser heiliges Land nicht, und wollen sich darüber hinaus noch das öffentliche Land und seine natürlichen Ressourcen aneignen;
Dass es eine Offensive des Gesetzgebers gegen die ursprünglichen Rechte unserer Völker, die Rechte anderer traditioneller Bevölkerungsgruppen und gegen die Rechte aller Brasilianer auf eine gesunde Umwelt gibt, die von der Agrarfraktion vorangetrieben wird. Diese Offensive besteht aus Dutzenden von Gesetzesvorlagen und Verfassungszusätzen – insbesondere die Vorschläge PEC 215/00, PEC 237/13, PEC 038/99, PL 1610/96 und PLP 227/12 –, die sogar gegen internationale, von Brasilien unterzeichnete Verträge verstoßen wie die Konvention 169 der Internationalen Arbeitsorganisation (ILO) und die Erklärung der Vereinten Nationen über die Rechte Indigener Völker;
Dass die brasilianische Bundesregierung selbst ein Verhalten des Unterlassens in bezug auf de Rechte der indigenen Völker zeigt, und conivente mit den Interessen der Ruralistas und des Großgrundbesitzes, unseren historischen Gegnern, die im vergangenen Jahr ein neues Waldgesetz zugunsten der eigenen Interessen verabschiedet haben, und die dieses Jahr die Rechte der Indigenen auf ihr Land annullieren möchten. aniquilar. Ein Verhalten, das sich in Maßnahmen wie dem Interministeriellen Erlass 419/2011 zeigt, im Erlass 303/2012 der Advocacia-Geral da União und im Dekret 7957/2013, und welches unter anderem dazu führt, dass die Demarkierung indigenen Landes, die Einrichtung von Naturschutzgebieten, die Landvergabe an Quilombos und die Umsetzung der Agrarreform eingefroren sind.
Der Zusammenschluss der Indigenen Völker Brasiliens (APIB) ruft anlässlich des 25-jährigen Bestehens der Verfassung alle indigenen Völker und Organisationen des Landes sowie die übrigen sozialen Bewegungen auf dem Land und in den Städten zu einer nationalen Mobilisierung zur Verteidigung der brasilianischen Verfassung und für die Implementierung der Landrechte der indigenen Völker, der Quilombolas, anderer tradtioneller Bevölkerungsgruppen, der Landbevölkerng und von Mutter Natur auf, in der Woche vom 30. September bis 5. Oktober 2013.