Posts Tagged ‘Belo Monte’

VIDEO: Climate Protection = Climate Crimes, a film by Ulrich Eichelmann

Sunday, February 10th, 2013

To watch video CLIMATE CRIMES in German
CLIMATE CRIMES in English

By Rebecca Sommer

When I first saw the film, I felt that it would be useful to screen it within the “holy walls” of the United Nations, where criminals are paving the way to “green” everything under the overall name “Green Economy” – and to force every negotiating party and sell-out NGO to sit in the room and watch Ulrich Eichelmann’s “Climate Crimes”.

The film doesn’t cover every detail of the multi layered criminal climate change-climate protection measurements that our governments and their international secretariat (the UN) are meddling with to make their “business” ideas to become international law, but Climate Crisis does show powerful images of unique ecosystems and species and people who are living within that nature, and how they are threatened, suffering and negatively affected.

The film makes aware that the supposedly ‘green energies’ such as biodiesel, biogas and hydroelectric dams are neither ecologically sensible nor sustainable, but are in fact crimes against nature.

The film shows us that on all continents our last remaining natural areas are doomed by these false solutions that are aiming to protect the climate, but in fact do the opposite of what we are told.

Climate Crimes reminds us that thousand of species are threatened by monoculture-agriculture everywhere, including in the last remaining natural environments in Germany. (And that many German companies and banks, often with the support of politicians, are involved in environmental crimes in other parts of the globe as well).

It showed really interesting and for our anti-dam movements very important film footages relevant to the Belo Monte dam in Brazil, and as I have been on the ground in the Belo Monte area for years, I can say that he and his camera team explained the horrific environmental issue best (of all films made so far), through extraordinary powerful and truthful images that explain why the Big Bend (Volta Grande) of the Xingu River is unique and so very important to preserve. The Big Bend part of the Xingu River will dry up if the mega dam would be finalized.

The film also covered the Ilisu dam issue at the Tigris River, which would flood Hasankeyf, one of the oldest cities in Anatolia in Turkey. Hasankeyf is renowned for its extensive cave dwellings and historical buildings dating from the fourth century, built on the border between the Eastern Roman and the Sassanid Empire. Climate Crimes shows how the blocking of the water of the Tigris River already has impacted the Mesopotamian Chibayis marshes downstream near Basra in southern Iraq, and even so the area was partly recovered would become a desert again, if the dam in Hasankeyf would be constructed.

The film also encouraged, by showing the local protest against the Ilisu dam, and timely with the films release, the anti-dam movement gained a victory as the Turkish high court ordered this year a halt to the construction of the Ilısu Dam because the Turkish government had not conducted the legally required Environmental Impact Assessment (ÇED).

Sounds all too familiar, the same happened with the Belo Monte dam, dam’s are halted, allowed to continue, halted again and allowed to continue again. Only the long breath of the anti-dam movements and time will tell who will win at the end. Nature, water, animals and people, or greed and destruction.

I applaud Ulrich Eichelmann for the film Climate Crimes, and that he has turned his back to WWF, which belongs to the business – criminals while wearing a “green” suit.

Deutsche Version: Menschenrechtsbeschwerde übermittelt an die Vereinten Nationen OHCHR vom Dachverband der Indigenen Völker Brasiliens (APIB)

Wednesday, November 21st, 2012

Übersetzt ins Deutsche von der Aktionsgemeinschaft Solidarische Welt e.V. (ASW)

(Dokument eingereicht von Uilton Tuxá (APIB) beim OHCHR in Genf, 13. November 2012)

Genf, 13. November 2012

Zur Situation der Indigenenrechte in Brasilien

Der Dachverband der Indigenen Völker Brasiliens (APIB) setzt sich aus den regionalen indigenen Organisationen des Landes zusammen:

· Articulação dos Povos indígenas do Nordeste e de Minas Gerais e Espírito Santo – APOINME (Verband der Indigenen Völker des Nordostens, Minas Gerais und Espirito Santo),

· Coordenação das Organizações Indígenas da Amazônia Brasileira – COIAB (Koordination der Indigenen Organisationen des Brasilianischen Amazonasgebietes),

· Articulação dos Povos Indígenas do Sul – ARPINSUL (Verband der Indigenen Völker des Südens),

· Articulação dos Povos Indígenas do Sudeste – ARPINSUDESTE (Verband der Indigenen Völker des Südostens),

· Articulação dos Povos Indígenas do Pantanal – ARPIPAN (Verband der Indigenen Völker des Pantanal),

· Grande Assembleia Guarani – ATY GUASU (Großes Gremium der Guarani).

Hiermit möchten wir unsere Besorgnis über die Zunahme der Menschenrechtsverletzungen und Missachtung der grundlegenden Rechte der indigenen Völker in Brasilien ausdrücken.

Unser Hauptanliegen ist, das System der Vereinten Nationen zu bitten, einzugreifen, sodass der brasilianische Staat den Empfehlungen der UN folgt und dringende Schritte einleitet, um die Einhaltung der Rechte indigener Völker sicherzustellen gemäß internationaler Übereinkommen, wie der Konvention ILO 169 und der Deklaration der Vereinten Nationen der Rechte indigener Völker. Letztere legt das Recht auf freien, vorherigen und informierten Konsent der indigenen Völker fest. Häufig werden unsere Rechte von der brasilianischen Regierung verletzt, trotz der Empfehlungen des UN-Rapporteurs für indigene Fragen über die Lage der Menschenrechte und Grundfreiheiten der indigenen Völker und der Inter-Amerikanischen Kommission für Menschenrechte (IACHR/OAS).

Brasilien gilt heute als eines der Länder mit dem weltweit größten wirtschaftlichen Wachstum in den letzten zehn Jahren. Es ist vom Status eines Schwellenlandes zur sechstgrößten Volkswirtschaft der Welt aufgestiegen. Unter der Regierung Dilma wurde in Sozialprogramme wie Bolsa Familia investiert, mit dem Ziel, den Hunger des in extremer Armut lebenden Bevölkerungteils zu beenden. Dennoch gibt es noch immer viele arme Familien. Vor allem die indigenen Völker Brasiliens müssen im Kontext von Armut leben.

In diesem Dokument präsentieren wir einen Überblick über die Situation indigener Völker in Brasilien.

Soziale Rechte

Die Wahrung der Rechte der indigenen Völker, wie in der Verfassung festgelegt, ist bei weitem nicht gewährleistet. Es mangelt an der Verabschiedung eines Gesetzes zur Regelung des Artikels 231 der Verfassung. Entgegen aller Versprechungen der aktuellen Präsidentin Dilma Rousseff und des Ex-Präsidenten Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva wurde ein solches Gesetz nicht verabschiedet.

Laut der Volkszählung von 2010, durchgeführt von dem Brasilianischen Institut für Geografie und Statistik (IBGE), leben insgesamt 817.963 Indigene in Brasilien. Davon leben mindestens 326.375 in extremer Armut (39,9%) – fast vier von zehn Indigenen. Im Gegensatz dazu weisen andere Segmente der brasilianischen Gesellschaft viel niedrigere Prozentsätze auf. So beträgt der Anteil der von extremer Armut Betroffenen bei der weißen Bevölkerung 4,7%, und bei der schwarzen Bevölkerung 10,0%. In diesem Zusammenhang muss erwähnt werden, dass Indigene nur 0,4 % der Gesamtbevölkerung Brasiliens stellen.

Land und indigene Territorien

Die brasilianische Regierung bekräftigt immer wieder, dass die Demarkierung der indigenen Territorien fast vollständig vollzogen wurde, für 95 % der Indigenengebiete. Dabei wird jedoch außer Acht gelassen, dass sich der angegebene Prozentsatz fast ausschließlich auf indigene Territorien innerhalb der Amazonasregion bezieht. Die Angabe lässt ebenfalls außer Acht, dass die Demarkierung und Regularisierung einiger dieser Gebiete auf Anreiz erheblicher finanzieller Unterstützung der internationalen Zusammenarbeit hin stattfand und mit geringer finanzieller Investition durch die brasilianische Regierung.

Ein Großteil der indigenen Bevölkerung in extremer Armut lebt im Norden (Amazonasregion) und im zentralen Westen, häufig auf Land, das bereits demarkiert wurde. Das zeigt, dass eine Demarkierung der indigenen Territorien nicht ausreicht, wenn nicht gleichzeitig würdige Arbeitsbedingungen und Voraussetzungen zur nachhaltigen Nutzung des Landes geschaffen werden. Die Angehörigen der indigenen Völker und Gemeinschaften benötigen, wie jeder andere Staatsbürger, nachhaltige Lebensbedingungen und den Schutz ihrer Territorien. Während in Regionen mit demarkierten Gebieten Armut herrscht, ist die Situation in anderen Regionen noch verheerender, wie im Nordosten und Süden des Landes, wo viele Indigenengebiete nicht demarkiert sind und Viehzüchter fortwährend in indigene Territorien eindringen.

Die Mehrheit der indigenen Völker Brasiliens ist dem Druck auf ihr Land, ihre Territorien und ihre natürlichen Ressourcen ungeschützt ausgesetzt. Indigene Gebiete sind von Großprojekten der Regierung zur wirtschaftlichen Entwicklung, wie dem Bau von Straßen, kleinen und großen Wasserkraftwerken und der Umsetzung des Wasserlaufs des Flusses São Francisco, vom Ausbau der Netze zur Elektrizitätsübertragung, dem Eindringen von Bergbau und Holzeinschlag, der Expansion der Landwirtschaft, Monokulturen sowie Konflikten mit Landeigentümern und Großgrundbesitzern bedroht.

Als Beispiele können die Fälle der indigenen Völker Guarani Kaiowá im Bundesstaat Mato Grosso do Sul, Pataxó Hã-Hã-Hãe, Pataxó und Tupinambá im Bundesstaat Bahia und der Xavante im Bundesstaat Mato Grosso aufgeführt werden. Die Guarani Kaiowá sind offener Diskriminierung und Ethnozid ausgesetzt. Sie leben in extrem kleinen Gebieten, in welche Viehzüchter, Pistoleiros (Revolvermänner), Landwirte und Agrarunternehmer mit Monokulturen wie Soja, Zuckerrohr und Eukalyptus eindringen. Im indigenen Territorium von Dourados ist die Mordrate aufgrund von Landkonflikten besonders hoch. Im Falle des indigenen Volkes der Pataxó Hãhãhãe im Bundesstaat Bahia warten die Indigenen seit mehr als 20 Jahren darauf, dass der Oberste Gerichtshof des Bundesgerichtes ihre Landsituation löst. Am 2. Mai dieses Jahres erklärte der Oberste Gerichtshof die Landtitel für ungültig, welche die Regierung von Bahia an Farmer der Region erteilt hatte. Die Regierung, welche für die Demarkierung indigener Gebiete zuständig ist, hat bisher nichts unternommen, um die zahlreichen Farmer vom indigenen Territorium zu entfernen.

Im Falle des Volkes Xavante im Bundesstaat Mato Grosso wird deutlich, dass die Absicht der lokalen Eliten darin besteht, die per Verfassung zugesichterten Rechte der indigenen Völker zu verletzen. Für die Wahrung dieser Rechte ist die Regierung zuständig. Das Indigenengebiet Maraiwatséde wurde 1998 ratifiziert und somit den Xavante das permanente Recht auf Besitz und exklusive Nutzung zugewiesen. Doch von der staatlichen Indigenenbehörde Fundação Nacional do Índio (FUNAI) wurde nichts unternommen, dieses Recht gegenüber den dort siedelnden Landwirten durchzusetzen – bis hin zu der Tatsache, dass die Legislative des Staates Mato Grosso zum Entsetzen der Xavante einem Gesetzesentwurf zustimmte, welcher die Umsiedlung der Xavante in einen bundesstaatlichen Park vorschlug, damit die nichtindigenen Produzenten und Landwirte auf dem indigenen Territorium bleiben können. In den südlichen Bundesstaaten des Landes existieren etwa 50 Camps, in denen die Guarani Kaiowá auf die Demarkierung, die Räumung der nicht-indigenen Landbesitzer und die Wiederbesiedlung ihres traditionellen Territoriums warten.

Aus den genannten Beispielen wird deutlich, dass die Situation der indigenen Völker Brasiliens insgesamt eine sehr bedrohliche ist. Ohne die Sicherung von Land und Territorium und ohne die Gewährleistung von Schutz und Nachhaltigkeit bieten sich keine Lebensperspektiven für die indigenen Völker.

Megaprojekte

An dieser Stelle möchten wir auf zwei Projekte der brasilianischen Regierung zur Entwicklung der Infrastruktur hinweisen, von denen mindestens 434 Auswirkungen auf indigene Territorien haben: Das Wasserkraftwerk Belo Monte in der Amazonasregion und die Umleitung des Flusses São Francisco im Nordosten des Landes. In beiden Fällen hat die brasilianische Regierung das Recht der indigenen Völker auf freien, vorherigen und informierten Konsent missachtet.

Das Projekt Belo Monte, schon vor mehr als 20 Jahren umstritten, wurde damals aufgrund des erbitterten Widerstandes der betroffenen indigenen Völker nicht ausgeführt. Dieses Projekt, auch als große Tragödie für die Umwelt angesehen, wird enorme soziale Probleme für die betroffenen indigenen Völker mit sich bringen. Eine Fläche von 500 Quadratkilometern wird überflutet werden.

Die Umleitung von Gewässern des Flusses Xingu im Bundesstaat Pará wird dazu führen, dass indigene Völker und traditionelle Gemeinschaften ohne Wasser, ohne Fisch und ohne fluvialen Transportweg bleiben, insbesondere die Menschen im Umkreis von bis zu 130 Kilometern Entfernung vom Projekt. Die Gemeinschaften werden unter den Auswirkungen des Projektes auf ihre traditionellen Formen der Produktion und Kultur zu leiden haben. Die Zuwanderung von 20.000 Arbeitern aus verschiedenen Regionen des Landes auf der Suche nach Einkünften und besseren Lebensbedingungen wird Konflikte und soziale Probleme mit sich bringen.

Die Umlegung des Flusses São Francisco in die Bundesstaaten Pernambuco, Paraíba, Ceará und Rio Grande do Norte sollte angeblich die arme Bevölkerung dieser Staaten mit Wasser versorgen. In Wirklichkeit wurde dieses Projekt jedoch entworfen, um die Agrarindustrie zu begünstigen und die ökonomischen und politischen Interessen anderer Sektoren der Region zu bedienen.

Der Fluss São Francisco durchfließt von seiner Quelle bis zu seiner Mündung traditionelle Territorien, die seit mehr als 9.000 Jahren von den indigenen Völkern des Nordostens besiedelt sind. Er hat eine Länge von etwa 2.800 km. In seinem Einzugsgebiet leben 32 indigene Völker, die 38 traditionelle Territorien bewohnen: Kaxagó, Kariri-Xocó, Tingui-Boto, Akona, Karapotó, Geripancó, Xoco, Katokin, Koiupanká, Karuazu, Kalankó, Pankararu, Fulni-ô, Xucuru-Kariri, Pankaiuká, Tuxá, Pipipã, Kambiwá, Kapinawá, Xukuru, Pankará, Tupan, Truká, Pankararé, Kantaruré, Atikum, Tumbalalá, Pankaru, Kiriri, Xacriabá, Kaxixó e Pataxó, mit einer Bevölkerung von ca. 70.000 Indigenen.

Der Fluss São Francisco ist von vitaler Bedeutung für das physische und kulturelle Überleben dieser Völker, ebenso für deren Produktionsform und die Weiterführung ihrer Rituale und Kultur. Die brasilianische Regierung ignoriert diesen Zusammenhang und die lautstarke Ablehnung seitens der indigenen sowie der nichtindigenen Bevölkerung und genehmigte den Bau des Projektes. Auf diese Weise wurde das Recht auf vorherige Konsultierung verletzt.

In Brasilien wird die Konvention ILO 169 nicht respektiert und deshalb nicht angewendet. Ein Beispiel hierfür ist das Ereignis im Jahr 2011, als die Interamerikanische Kommission für Menschenrechte (IACHR) die brasilianische Regierung bat, den Prozess zur Genehmigung und zum Bau von Belo Monte einzustellen, solange die betroffenen indigenen Völker nicht ordnungsgemäß konsultiert wurden.

Die brasilianische Regierung informierte daraufhin am 5. April, dass sie ihre institutionelle Rolle der Konsultierung der indigenen Gemeinschaften erfüllt hat. In Wirklichkeit fanden einfache Sozialisierungs- und Informationstreffen statt, welche manipuliert wurden, um ihnen den Charakter von Konsultationen zu verleihen. Außerdem kam es zu Ereignissen, die geprägt waren von Vorwürfen der Spaltung, Praktiken der Kooptierung und Diffamierung von indigenen Führern.

Eindeutig fehlt es dem brasilianischen Staat an gutem Willen. Es fehlt der politische Wille, indigene Völker tatsächlich bei Projekten, die Auswirkungen auf sie haben werden, zu konsultieren und sie an Instanzen der Entscheidungsfindung über legislative und administrative Maßnahmen, welche sie direkt betreffen, mit einzubeziehen.

Kriminalisierung, Gesundheit und andere Aspekte

Die Verletzung der Indigenenrechte in Brasilien ist in jeder Hinsicht besorgniserregend. Nach dem neuesten Jahresbericht des Indigenous Missionary Council (CIMI) vom 30. Juni 2011 starben im Jahr 2010 92 Kinder aufgrund mangelnder medizinischer Versorgung. 60 Indigene wurden ermordet und 152 erhielten Morddrohungen. Von den 60 Morden an Indigenen ereigneten sich 34 bei den Guarani Kaiowá im Bundesstaat Mato Grosso do Sul.

Die Gesundheitsversorgung für indigene Völker ist unzureichend. Die Spezialbehörde für die Gesundheit der Indigenen, welche 2010 eingerichtet wurde, funktioniert nicht adäquat und ihre Struktur genügt nicht, um eine gesundheitliche Basisversorgung zu gewährleisten. Gleiches trifft auch auf die staatliche Indigenenbehörde Fundação Nacional do Índio (FUNAI) zu, deren Umstrukturierung zur Verbesserung ihrer Arbeit an der Basis, hauptsächlich hinsichtlich der Prozesse zur Regelung von indigenen Territorien, versprochen wurde. Bisher konnten noch keine derartigen Strukturveränderungen festgestellt werden. Tatsächlich unterliegt dieses Organ zum Schutz der Indigenen einer gezielten Vernachlässigung durch die Regierung, damit eben gerade keine Fortschritte bei Prozessen der Landdemarkierung erreicht werden können.

Indigenenrechte

In Bezug auf die Rechte der Indigenen warten wir seit über 20 Jahren darauf, dass der Nationalkongress das neue Statut der indigenen Völker verabschiedet, welches in Form des Gesetzentwurfs N° PL 760/2011 vorliegt. Dieser schlägt die Regularisierung der Artikel 231 und 232 der brasilianischen Verfassung vor, welche die Rechte Indigener behandeln. Außerdem warten wir auf die Verabschiedung des Gesetzentwurfs n° PL 3571/2008 zur Schaffung des Nationalen Rates für Indigenenpolitik, der im Verfahren der Abgeordnetenkammer ist. Mangels Verbindlichkeit der aktuellen Regierung kommen diese legislativen Prozesse im Kongress nicht voran. In Wahrheit besteht kein Interesse der Regierung, Gesetze zur Garantierung von Indigenenrechten zu verabschieden. Die Projekte des Plans zur Beschleunigung des Wachstums (Plano de Aceleração do Crescimento – PAC) verdeutlichen die Absichten der Regierung, unser traditionelles Territorium auszubeuten.

Anti-indigene legislative Prozesse

PEC 215/2000. Entgegen der Erwartungen des Schutzes indigener Rechte wurde am 21. März dieses Jahres im Ausschuss für Verfassung und Justiz (Comissão de Constituição e Justiça – CCJ) der Abgeordnetenkammer der Zulässigkeit des Vorschlages der Verfassungsänderung (PEC) 215/00 zugestimmt. PEC 215/00 beabsichtigt die Zuständigkeit für die Genehmigung der Demarkierung von Indigenengebieten, die Einrichtung von Schutzgebieten, und Landtitulierung für Quilombolas auf den Nationalkongress zu übertragen. Bisher unterliegen diese Aufgaben den exekutiven Organen FUNAI, Institut für Umwelt und erneuerbare Ressourcen – IBAMA (Instituto Brasileiro do Meio Ambiente e dos Recursos Naturais Renováveis) und Kulturstiftung Palmares – FCP (Fundação Cultural Palmares). Die Verabschiedung des PEC 215, sowie des im Senat verhandelten PEC 038/99, gefährden die bereits demarkierten Indigenengebiete und schließen weitere Demarkierungen zukünftig aus. Die Gefahr einer Verabschiedung ist groß, da im Kongress mehrheitlich Repräsentanten mächtiger Sektoren der Wirtschaft vertreten sind, welche die Sponsoren des aktuellen Entwicklungsmodells sind.

Bergbauprojekt PL 1610/1996. Die Bergbaulobby, zusammengesetzt aus Parlamentariern der Regierungsallianz, beabsichtigt den Gesetzentwurf PL 1610/96 zu verabschieden. Dieser sieht Bergbau in Indigenengebieten vor. Der Bericht ignoriert völlig die Wahrung des Schutzes der territorialen, sozialen, kulturellen und spirituellen Integrität der indigenen Völker und entbürokratisiert die Autorisierung von bergbaulichen Untersuchungen und dem Abbau mineralischer Bodenschätze in Indigenengebieten. Er schafft Voraussetzungen für eine erleichterte Gewinnerzielung und Gewinnvergrößerung zugunsten der involvierten Unternehmen. Der Text beschäftigt sich in skandalöser Form mit der Verfügbarmachung der Indigenengebiete und ihrer Potentiale für das spekulative Finanzkapital durch Bergbau. Der Text schafft die Voraussetzungen für ein unkontrolliertes Fortschreiten des Goldabbaus im großen Stil auf indigenen Territorien. Er greift in Isolation lebende und wenig kontaktierte indigene Völker an, indem er deren Schicksal den Prinzipien der nationalen Sicherheit unterordnet. Er relativiert die Beteiligung der Bundesanwaltschaft (Ministério Público Federal) in seiner Rolle für den Schutz der Indigenenrechte. Er schafft die Autonomie der indigenen Völker ab und unterwirft deren Entscheidung gegen den Bergbau dem Beschluss eines Regierungsausschusses, der entscheidet, welcher Vorschlag der beste für die indigenen Gemeinschaften ist. Auf diese Weise wird die bevormundende, paternalistische und autoritäre Indigenenpolitik wiederbelebt. Abschließend ist zu sagen, dass der Text die Tragweite des Konsultationsrechtes minimiert, welches durch die Verfassung und die Konvention ILO 169 festgelegt wurde.

Die Indigenenorganisationen sind wegen der Schäden, die es mit sich bringt, gegen diesen Gesetzentwurf zur Förderung des Bergbaus. Sie fordern, dass das Thema des Bergbaus im Text des Statuts der Indigenen Völker behandelt wird, wie es in den Jahren 2008 und 2009 von der indigenen Bewegung mit der Regierung diskutiert und in Konsens gebracht wurde.

Administrative und juristische Maßnahmen gegen Indigenenrechte

Die brasilianische Regierung hat in den letzten zwei Jahren eine Reihe von gesetzlichen Erlässen und Verordnungen herausgebracht, welche beabsichtigen, die von den indigenen Völkern geforderte Demarkierung ihrer Gebiete zu vereiteln und diese Territorien und deren natürliche Ressourcen der unkontrollierten Exploration durch nationale Unternehmen und das transnationale spekulative Finanzkapital preiszugeben. Von diesen gesetzlichen Erlässen und Verordnungen (Portarias) stellen wir folgende vor:

Verordnung 2498/2011 beabsichtigt die Beteiligung der Bundesländer und Munizipien im Prozess der Identifizierung und Grenzziehung von Indigenengebieten. Mit der Herausgabe dieser Maßnahme ignoriert die Regierung die Verordnung 1775/96, welche das Vorgehen zur Demarkierung von Indigenengebieten festlegt und die schon das angebliche Widerspruchsrecht für die Schaffung dieser Portaria garantiert.

Verordnung 419/2011 regelt das Vorgehen der Indigenenbehörde FUNAI in Umweltgenehmigungsprozessen innerhalb eines sehr kurzen Zeitraums, um die Umsetzung von Projekten des Programms zur Beschleunigung des Wachstums – PAC (Wasserkraft-werke, Bergbau, Häfen, Wasserwege, Straßen, Elektrizitätsleitungen) auf indigenen Territorien zu erleichtern.

Verordnung 303/2012 bestimmt die Normierung der Vorgehensweise der juristischen Organe der Bundesverwaltung, die direkt und indirekt mit dem institutionellen Schutz der Indigegengebiete zu tun haben. Den Interessen der Großgrundbesitzer und des Agribusiness entgegenkommend, erlaubt die Verordnung, die Bestimmungen, welche im Gerichtsverfahren gegen das Indigenengebiet Raposa Serra do Sol vom Obersten Gerichtshof (STF) entschieden wurden, auf alle Indigenengebiete auszuweiten (Petição 3.888-Roraima/STF). Die Regierung brachte die Verordnung mit dem Wissen heraus, dass die Entscheidung des Obersten Gerichtshofes über die deklaratorischen Unterbindungen der Raposa Serra do Sul noch nicht rechtskräftig ist, die Bestimmungen noch Änderungen erfahren oder gänzlich vom Verfassungsgericht abgelehnt werden können. Die Portaria gestattet Militärbasen und Militärinterventionen, Straßenbau, strategische Projekte für Wasserkraftwerke und Bergbau in Indigenengebieten ohne vorherige Konsultation der indigenen Völker und der FUNAI. Des Weiteren legt sie die Revision von laufenden Demarkierungsprozessen und bereits erfolgten Demarkierungen fest, da diese nicht mit der Entscheidung des Obersten Gerichtshofes im Fall des Indigenengebietes Raposa Serra do Sol übereinstimmen. Die Verordnung greift die Autonomie der indigenen Völker über ihre Territorien an; beschränkt und relativiert das per Verfassung zugesicherte ausschließliche Nutzungsrecht der Naturreichtümer durch Indigene in Indigenengebieten. Sie überträgt dem Chico-Mendes-Institut für Biodiversitätsschutz (Instituto Chico Mendes de Conservação da Biodiversidade – ICMBIO) die Kontrolle über Indigenengebiete, die missbräuchlich und illegalerweise von Schutzgebieten (Unidades de Conservação – UCs) überlagert werden, und schafft Probleme hinsichtlich der Überprüfung der Grenzen von demarkierten Indigenengebieten. Dabei bleibt das Recht der Indigenen auf ihr traditionelles Territorium gänzlich unberücksichtigt.

Petition

Angesichts dieser Situation wendet sich der Dachverband der Indigenen Völker Brasiliens (Articulação dos Povos Indígenas do Brasil – APIB) an das Menschenrechtssystem der Vereinten Nationen, um notwendige Maßnahmen zur genaueren Beobachtung der Situation der Indigenenrechte und der Verletzung dieser Rechte in Brasilien einzufordern. Möglich wäre ein gemeinsames Handeln mit mehreren Berichterstattern, zum Beispiel durch Unterstützung einer gemeinsamen Mission mit dem Sachverständigenausschuss für die Durchführung der Übereinkommen und Empfehlungen, um die Umsetzung der Konvention ILO 169 und der Deklaration der Vereinten Nationen der Rechte indigener Völker zu prüfen.

Bei dieser Gelegenheit möchten wir den Vereinten Nationen vorschlagen, ein Online-Übersetzungssystem einzurichten, damit auch Bürger der UN-Mitgliedsstaaten, welche nicht die offiziellen Sprachen sprechen, wie im Fall der indigenen Völker Brasiliens, ihre Anliegen mitteilen können.

Mit Zuversicht auf ihre Unterstützung und Aufmerksamkeit verbschieden wir uns und stehen Ihnen jederzeit zur Klärung der in diesem Dokument angesprochenen Sachverhalte zur Verfügung.

Hochachtungsvoll,


Manoel Uilton dos Santos / Indigener vom Volk Tuxá
Leitung des Dachverbandes der Indigenen Völker Brasiliens – APIB



Sign “Xingu Vivo” Petition against Belo Monte

Monday, November 5th, 2012

To SIGN Petition click  here


Your Honors

Dr. Carlos Ayres Britto, President of the Federal Supreme Court – STF, Dr. Mário César Ribeiro, President of the TRF-1, Dr. Arthur Pinheiro Chaves, Titular Judge of the 9th Federal Court of Belém, Dr. Célia Regina Ody Bernardes, Federal Substitute Judge of the 2nd Circuit Court/MT, Raimunda do Carmo G. Noronha, President of the Court of Justice of the State of Pará, Members of the National Council of Justice – CNJ

with a copy to: Hon. Mr. Luiz Inácio Lucena Adams, Attorney General of the Union – AGU, Hon. Mr. Roberto Monteiro Gurgel Santos, Federal Prosecutor of the Republic, Hon. Mr. Ophir Filgueiras Cavalcante Junior, President of the Federal Council of the Order of Attorneys of Brazil, Hon. Mr. Gilberto Carvalho, Secretary General, Presidency of the Republic
Hon. Mrs. Maria do Rosário Nunes, Minister, Secretary of Human Rights / PR, Hon. Mrs. Isabella Teixeira, Minister of the Environment, Hon. Mr. Volney Zanardi, President of IBAMA,
Hon. Mrs. Marta do Amaral Azevedo, President of FUNAI
Hon. Mr. Paulo Paim, President of the Commission for Human Rights and Participative Legislation – CDH Federal Senate
Hon. Mr. Rodrigo Rollemberg, President of the Commission for the Environment, Consumer Protection and Surveillance and Control – CMA, Federal Senate
Hon. Mr. Domingos Dutra, President of the Commission for Human Rights and Minorities – CDHM, House of Representatives
Hon. Mr. Sarney Filho, President of the Commission of the Environment and Sustainable Development of the House of Representatives

October 31, 2012

We, international civil society organizations and movements committed to the defense of human rights, the strengthening of democracy, and of development alongside socio-environmental responsibility, call attention to the existence of grave problems surrounding the Brazilian Judiciary’s treatment of irregularities in the licensing process for the Belo Monte hydroelectric dam on the Xingu River in the Brazilian Amazon, which are being questioned by civil society as well as by Brazil’s Federal Public Ministry and Public Defenders.

The authorization of Belo Monte by Brazil’s National Congress, by means of Legislative Decree no. 788/2005, violated the right to free, prior and informed consent guaranteed to indigenous peoples who are affected by the project. Fulfilling of its role to defend the Brazilian Constitution and in defense of human rights, the Federal Public Ministry (MPF) filed a Civil Public Action lawsuit in 2006 to annul the cited congressional decree. Six years passed before courts ruled upon the lawsuit’s merit, when the relevant circuit court (TRF-1) finally ruled that construction be paralyzed on 08/13/2012, suspending the decree that illegally authorized Belo Monte. Days after the decision of the TRF1, at the request of the office of the AGU (Attorney General), the President (Chief Justice) of the STF determined that the project could continue, ignoring all arguments pertaining to the case’s merit, and ultimately postponing any resolution of the court challenge.

Presidents and directors of the Brazilian Institute for the Environment and Renewable Resources IBAMA quickly ceded licenses and authorizations to the Belo Monte consortium Norte Energia, disregarding all of the risks stemming from grave irregularities with the licensing process. The granting of these permits indicates the use of powerful political pressure, as they contradict the technical opinions of IBAMA’s own staff. In addition to this, legal conditions placed upon the issuing of environmental licenses, which are obligatory for initiation and continuity of construction, have been repeatedly disregarded by the dam-building consortium.

The countless illegalities associated with the environmental licensing process led Brazil’s Federal Public Ministry (MPF) to file 13 Civil Public Actions and 2 Actions of Administrative Fraud by the middle of 2012. Nearly all the legal actions filed by the MPF and the Public Defender’s Office of Pará remain unresolved in the Judiciary, as a result of:

1) unjustified delays, where judges’ decisions are deferred, staying initial rulings that favored preliminary injunctions;

2) conflicts of jurisdiction between the Federal Court in Altamira and the recently created 9th Environmental Court in Belém, leaving cases stalled for more than a year at the decisive moment when construction commenced; and

3) abusive use of the legal instrument known as “suspension of security”.

“Suspension of security” is an authoritarian and anti-democratic legal instrument frequently employed by judiciary powers in the rulings of high courts to impose political decisions on legal judgments, paralyzing their implementation while guaranteeing that the interests of the government and the private sector are met. Its norms were originally implemented in an extra-constitutional manner by the legislature to meet the needs of the military regime, and have remained in Brazil’s legal code since the period of the dictatorship. This device defers the possibility of definitive judicial rulings on the legality and legitimacy of the legislative and administrative measures taken during the environmental licensing of Belo Monte. Presidents of high courts have repeatedly resorted to this mechanism to suspend legal rulings that prohibited the initiation and/or continuation of the damming of the Xingu River. While judgments on the legal merit of the Belo Monte lawsuits face years of delays, the AGU has obtained the overturning of preliminary injunctions, at times in a matter of hours, through the use of the “suspension of security” mechanism.

The rationale behind the use of this mechanism is inconsistent, citing a dubious argument that Brazil would suffer from blackouts without the construction of Belo Monte, resulting in a grave threat to public order, while damaging the economy. Recent technical studies for the electricity sector demonstrate opportunities for energy efficiency and alternative energy production with low socio-environmental and financial costs and economic viability when compared with hydroelectric dams. However, the government is not open to debate.

There are currently no legal studies or decisions with findings that contradict the grave technical and juridical illegalities of the project as presented in the lawsuits filed by the MPF, public defenders, and by civil society organizations. How can a democratic society accept the use of unconstitutional instruments that undermine the responsibility of the Judiciary to uphold the Constitution? How can we ignore principles that dictate the supreme importance of public interest in the protection of the environment over that of private interests? How can arbitrary decisions be allowed that result in grave violations to the fundamental rights of affected populations, in addition to irreversible damages to Brazilian social, cultural and environmental heritage?

Decisions that uphold respect for constitutional guarantees, Brazil’s Democratic State of Laws and the foundations and objectives of the Republic of Brazil have been validated by Brazilian society. One example is the aforementioned decision by the Fifth Circuit Court of the TRF-1 that ruled on the obligation to provide prior consultation with the indigenous peoples affected by Belo Monte, according to Article 231 of the Federal Constitution and Convention 169 of the International Labor Organization (ILO), both of which stipulate legitimate, fundamental and incontestable rights. It should be highlighted that the same findings appear in preliminary decisions that forbid the start and continuity of the project, given the proportion of the socio-environmental risks presented by the dam’s licensing process. These decisions cannot be subordinated to groundless or monocratic sentences founded on authoritarian artifice, steeped in unconstitutionality and illegitimacy.

The legal situation of the rights of fishermen, as well as riverine and farming communities of the Xingu is also dramatic. These traditional populations depend exclusively on the river for their livelihoods, subsistence, navigation, and cultural reproduction. In spite of warnings by specialists about Belo Monte’s consequences to navigation and fishing on the river, environmental licenses were conceded with neither mitigation nor compensation measures to offset the impacts upon affected people. The moral damages as well was economic, social, cultural, and environmental losses that have already begun to affect these communities were not measured in advance, nor within the adequate Brazilian standards required for Brazilian companies. For this reason, the few measures that have been taken are insufficient to offset these impacts.7 This situation is aggravated by the fact that the dam-building consortium does not recognize the existence of these impacts and has declared in meetings with extrativist groups that it will not assume responsibility for the various consequences of its own project. 8

All of these problems and threats have been brought before the courts by the defenders of affected populations. 9 One lawsuit received and injunction that was quickly suspended in 2011, as the ruling judge did not consider the evidence that was presented due to the absence of the losses and harm claimed by the plaintiffs, without actually demonstrating the basis for his decision.10 There are more than 32 lawsuits with individual and collective demands of these traditional populations in the courts, nearly all of them paralyzed.

The number of injunctions resulting from these lawsuits is insignificant and without tangible meaning for the life of thousands of people, many who still live in areas adjacent to the dam’s work camps among explosions and the traffic of heavy vehicles, among other impacts of the project. Because of the concession of licenses and legal decisions, these communities now find themselves in a situation of uninterrupted rights violations and the loss of their way of life provoked by the damming of the Xingu. It should be stressed that the right to work is raised in almost all of the lawsuits. Yet in the case of Belo Monte, the courts have disrespected principles and guarantees for workers’ rights such as swift, dynamic and simple procedures with short deadlines and less solemn rites. These are consummate historical rights that guarantee the protection and juridical effectiveness for workers rights in Brazil.

Desperate with the destruction of their livelihood and ways of life, a group of fishermen and boat pilots recently set up camps on fluvial islands near Belo Monte’s cofferdams to demand that urgent measures be taken. In reaction, the company legally requested the de-occupation of the encamped areas. The mandate received compliance in 24 hours, but other affected groups joined and the protest continued.

It was necessary to protest for one month on the cofferdam in disgraceful conditions before the courts placed conditions on the de-occupation orders, obliging the company to hear the communities and competent organizations in order to find a solution. Even so, the meeting took place without complying with the conditions obligated by the courts. The meeting resulted in the right to a technical audit of the river at the expense of the company, mandating the participation of assigned delegates from the fishermen colony. The agreement legally obliges the company to attend to th demands of affected people, but permits the project to continue while its compliance with demands, even those of the utmost urgency, are indefinitely delayed. Therefore the fishermen determine that in practice this judicial negotiation only served to allow the consortium to quickly and definitively dam the river, while affected people’s rights continue to be violated. Proof of this is that immediately following the meeting the courts guaranteed the de-occupation of the area, allowing the project to resume.

In summary, in the name of a supposed “public interest” members of the judiciary are doing harm to the judicial order, with the fundamental rights of the affected populations being discarded in favor of the ongoing construction, revealing that we are faced with a state of exceptions that violates, with the characteristics of a dictatorship, the Democratic State of Laws and Brazilian society as a whole.

Petition for urgent measures

Given the grave situations denounced above we APPEAL to the authorities to take the following urgent measures:

1) Rule upon all the lawsuits brought by the MPF, Pará State Public Defenders, and civil society pertaining to the case of Belo Monte, with urgency and priority for: a) Judgment by Brazil’s Supreme Court (STF) on the Public Civil Action lawsuit pertaining to the absence of prior consultation with indigenous communities. Urge that the STF issue an opinion on the merit of the decision by the 5th Court of the TRF1 (First Circuit Court), addressing the Agravo Regimental (Internal Appeal for review of previous decisions) and judge on the cases’ merit(s) before Belo Monte becomes a fait acompli;

b) Judgment by the Federal Court of Belém on the filings for preliminary injunctions of the Public Civil Action lawsuits of the MPF on the necessity of preventing the removal of the Arara and Juruna indigenous peoples of the Volta Grande (Big Bend) and to assure respect for the rights of nature and of future generations;

c) Emergency emphasis upon the obligation to suspend the project, requiring the presentation of the socio-economic documentation with respect to the housing rights of and land regularization for rural communities;

d) Emergency ruling on suspended injunctions and required precautionary measures to protect the life and security of fishermen, riverine peoples, and farmers. Urgent recognition of the paralyzed lawsuits relating to the rights being violated as a result of the damming of the Xingu, above all the disrespect to the right to housing being carried out through the compulsory eviction of families and the fundamental respect to work, considering the short, medium, and long term impacts of the project upon these rights.

2) Monitoring by the National Council of Justice (CNJ) of lawsuits in cases pertaining to infrastructure projects like Belo Monte while establishing measures to assure prompt and immune judicial rulings.

3) We ask that before proffering their decision, that magistrates at least hear representatives of affected communities, organized civil society, academia, as well as representatives of all parties involved in the lawsuit. When possible they should visit the areas that are the object of the lawsuits in order to assess the socio-environmental damages provoked by the project and the modus operandi of the construction consortium. Most of all, they should visit the area to understand its natural attributes and the relationship between the environment and the local communities impacted by the projects before ruling over the direction of their lives. The single purpose of this request is to assist the judge in issuing an impartial decision, because we believe that a more tangible relationship with the case will help them to make well-informed decisions.

We believe that the respect for Brazilian democracy, constitutional guarantees and socio-environmental responsibility must always be held paramount in the defense of public interest. We depend on Your Excellences to attend to this appeal and take urgent measures that seek to safeguard the constitutional role of the Brazilian Judiciary.

Cordially,

The signatory Civil Society Organizations

Indigenas afetados por Belo Monte detêm engenheiros da Norte Energia em a

Thursday, July 26th, 2012

Três engenheiros que trabalham para a Norte Energia, consórcio responsável pela hidrelétrica de Belo Monte, estão detidos na aldeia Muratu após uma fracassada reunião sobre os mecanismos que a empresa pretende oferecer para transpor embarcações após o barramento completo do Xingu na altura do canteiro de obras de Pimental.

A empresa precisa de uma licença do Ibama para fechar a barragem do rio – conhecida como ensecadeira de Pimental – e, para tanto, pretendia realizar quatro reuniões de consultas às populações indígenas e ribeirinhas que ficarão sem acesso fluvial à Altamira. A consultas também são uma condição para que a Funai faça um parecer que autorize ou não a conclusão do barramento, a ser apresentado ao órgão ambiental.

Maria and Ozimara Juruna washing Açaí in the Xingu River, Volta Grande (Photo © Rebecca Sommer)

Maria and Ozimara Juruna washing Açaí in the Xingu River, Volta Grande (Photo © Rebecca Sommer)

A primeira reunião foi programada para esta segunda, 23, na aldeia Muratu, com a presença de indígenas Juruna da Terra Indígena Paquiçamba e dos arara da aldeia Arara da Volta Grande. De acordo com o Ministério Público Federal, que esteve presente, logo no início das explanações os indígenas já manifestaram desacordo com o processo, uma vez que as explicações dos engenheiros eram extremamente técnicas e de impossível compreensão.

Arara woman giving a bath to her tame forest-pig in the Xingu River, Volta Grande (Photo © Rebecca Sommer)

Arara woman giving a bath to her tame forest-pig in the Xingu River, Volta Grande (Photo © Rebecca Sommer)

“Havia também um clima de completa descrença dos índios na empresa, uma vez que nenhuma das condicionantes que a Norte Energia deveria ter realizado para minimizar os impactos das obras nas aldeias foi cumprida até agora”, explica a procuradora do MPF Thais Santi. “A uma certa altura, os próprios engenheiros reconheceram que a reunião era absurda, que aquilo não era oitiva, que a Funai não poderia considerar a reunião como tal, e que o projeto técnico que estavam apresentando não fazia nenhum sentido”, diz a procuradora.

Na manhã desta terça, 24, após o pernoite dos engenheiros na aldeia, os indígenas comunicaram à equipe que eles estariam detidos e não poderiam deixar o local até que algumas demandas fossem atendidas pela Norte Energia. “Ninguém entendeu nada do que os técnicos falavam, e eles mesmo não tinham nenhuma resposta às nossas perguntas”, explica Giliarde Juruna, liderança da TI Paquiçamba. “Não souberam falar como ficará o banzeiro do rio, como nós vamos navegar, e nem o que tinha mudado no projeto desde a primeira versão que eles apresentaram no ano passado. E no final os engenheiros falaram que a gente estava certo mesmo. Mas nós não vamos dar moleza não. Hoje a voadeira que foi lelevar comida pra eles ficou detida, e quem for pra aldeia, vai ficar. Só vamos liberar a imprensa”, afirma Giliarde.

Antecedentes

Os grupos indígenas que deveriam ser consultados sobre o barramento do rio esta semana foram os mesmos que ocuparam a ensecadeira de Pimental por 21 dias a partir do final de junho, para cobrar o cumprimento das condicionantes indígenas. A falta de qualquer resposta da empresa ao documento encaminhado à direção da Norte Energia após o processo de negociação da desocupação da ensecadeira contribuiu para a descrença generalizada nas promessas e propostas do consórcio, afirmaram os indígenas. “Passaram 20 dias desde a última reunião e a Norte Energia não fez absolutamente nada”, diz Giliarde.

Segundo ele, os três engenheiros da empresa só serão liberados diante do atendimento das seguintes demandas:
– Suspensão das reuniões sobre o mecanismo de transposição;
– Compromisso do IBAMA e da FUNAI de que a obra no rio não será liberada enquanto não houver clareza e segurança sobre a transposição, enquanto não forem concluídas as estradas de acesso às aldeias e enquanto não forem cumpridas as condicionantes que estão pendentes;
– Reabertura das negociações com a Norte Energia acerca dos compromissos assumidos pelo presidente de empresa, Carlos Nascimento, após a desocupação da ensecadeira em meados de julho. Nascimento teria pedido um “voto de confiança” e se comprometeu a retornar a Altamira no último dia 16 para retomar as negociações, mas não compareceu;
– Conclusão do sistema de abastecimento de água nas aldeias das Terras Indígenas afetadas, que não têm poço e usam a água do rio. Quando começou a intervenção no Xingu em janeiro de 2012, os índios denunciaram ao MPF que a qualidade da água estava afetada, foi feita uma vistoria em fevereiro deste ano e a Norte Energia assumiu o compromisso de resolver o problema, o que não ocorreu. De acordo com os índios, os poços começaram a ser feitos mas, depois de três meses, ainda não foram concluídos;
– Definição sobre a ampliação/revisão da TI Paquiçamba.
MPF pediu cancelamento da licença de instalação de Belo Monte

Em função do não cumprimento das condicionantes de Belo Monte pela Norte Energia, nesta segunda o Ministério Público Federal entrou na Justiça com uma medida cautelar exigindo o cancelamento da licença da usina. De acordo com o MPF, informações do prórpio Ibama, da prefeitura de Altamira e de lideranças locais mostram que iniciativas obrigatórias estão há um ano sem sair do papel.

Fonte XVPS: clique : aqui

INDIGENOUS PEOPLES REGION ALTAMIRA OCCUPY BELO MONTE DAM

Saturday, June 23rd, 2012

Since yesterday, Thursday 21/6/2012, the indigenous peoples affected by the hydroelectric dam Belo Monte occupy an area of the dams construction. They decided for the occupation in order to express their dissatisfaction at the disregard of their rights and the non-compliance with the (construction agreements) conditions, especially those relating to the Indigenous peoples. Organized by themselves and with their own resources, they occupied “Pimental”, and the work-in-progress site that is intended to allow construction. The demonstration is peaceful, and the Indigenous peoples request the presence of government representatives and the Northern Energy corporation.

Yesterday, the Earth’s Indigenous Xikrin Trench-Bacajá and Juruna Paquiçamba came to the cofferdam by river, from its IT, which are downstream of the dam in the region that suffer from drought in the project area called the Low Flow Xingu. Ships also left Altamira, where some Indians arrived by road from the more distant villages, and from where indigenous people reside or remained in the city. Are expected the Arara of the Big Bend of the Xingu and representatives of all indigenous lands in the region, coming from Iriri and Xingu rivers upstream of Altamira, in addition to the townspeople. This morning depart Paracana leaders to meet those who are already camped in the cofferdam.

The Indians are unhappy with the situation, since the conditions that should precede the works are not being adequately met in their lands and Altamira. Besides those that affect us all – as the delay in investing in the infrastructure of the city, health services and education and basic sanitation are increasingly burdened with the population increase already felt throughout the region – the indigenous peoples are concerned with the delay in implementation of the Basic Environmental Plan – indigenous component (PBA), which should establish and implement programs of compensation and mitigation of impacts already felt in the region by the Indians, with the delay in delivery of the Xikrin Complementary Studies River Bacajá , which for now have only been presented in the villages, and would allow a better scaling of impacts on this river and the Xikrin, and guarantee the definition of compensation programs and mitigation of these impacts, especially to predict that the drought will suffer from its river construction of the project, by ignorance of the PBA by the Indians, which is asked more and better performances for all to understand, the delay in defining the situation of indigenous land tenure Land Wanga, Paquiçamba, 17 km from the Juruna and Cachoeira Seca, be vague the transposition system of the dam and the fear that they are isolated from Altamira, a town where the main services that meet them (health, education, offices FUNAI); not authorize the construction of more roads as an alternative to river transport currently used by the Indians and that will be hampered by implementation of the dam and drought (reduced flow) of the riverbed, and the lack of necessary investment and infrastructure prior to work in the affected villages, such as to ensure the abstraction of drinking water in villages in the Volta Grande do Xingu, in which the water of the river, until then consumed by the population, is already muddy and unhealthy due to construction.

Belo Monte Insurer Dropped from Sustainability Index

Thursday, May 3rd, 2012

By Zachary Hurwitz for International Rivers

The humongous risks and costs in constructing the Belo Monte Dam in the middle of the Amazon are beginning to be felt, not surprisingly, in the stock market.  Munich Re, one of the world’s largest insurance companies and one of a dozen insurers and reinsurers that signed on to cover the risks of building Belo Monte, was dropped from the prestigious Global Challenges Index, which lists companies that “have made substantial, forward-looking contributions to surmounting global challenges,” such as climate change, drinking water, deforestation, biodiversity, poverty, and responsible governance, among others.

Munich Re is responsible for covering 25% of Belo Monte loan guarantees, along with other mega-insurance companies such as MAPFRE, IRB-Brazil Re, JLT Re, Klin, Fator, ACE, and others.  The latest estimates show that the project total may reach as high as $18 billion USD (or 34 billion reais as of today’s exchange).  In other words, this is an astronomical insurance policy for Brazil’s most costly and most risky infrastructure project ever.

In case you missed it (which is very likely), here is the headline and news snippet from last week:

Munich Re removed from Global Challenges Index due to violation of environmental standards

The construction of the Belo Monte dam in the Amazon region of Brazil has come under heavy criticism because of the impact the dam may have on the environment and local residents. Experts anticipate that it will have adverse effects on the Amazon rainforest, particularly on species diversity, and hence also on the livelihoods of the indigenous inhabitants. Due to its involvement in this project, Munich Re has been excluded from the Global Challenges Index (GCX). By agreeing to provide cover for the construction phase of the project, the reinsurer violated the GCX’s strict environmental regulations.

Waterfall at Xingu River, Volta Grande (Photo © Rebecca Sommer)

Waterfall at Xingu River, Volta Grande (Photo © Rebecca Sommer)

Investors in general have started to realize that large dams in the Amazon are so destructive, so high-risk, that even lavish public subsidies and huge insurance policies can’t cover up what is clearly a bad investment.  In fact, investments in massive dams such as Belo Monte may actually be drawing investment away from other sectors which could really benefit the public, reported this Bloomberg Markets Magazine story in April.

Investing in mega-dams in the Amazon is not only weakening Brazil’s standing as a player in international environmental sustainability and threatening the government’s compliance with international covenants such as ILO169.

It’s also a bad place to put your money.

AGU pede afastamento de procurador Felicio Pontes em casos que envolvam construção de hidrelétricas

Sunday, December 18th, 2011

ISA, Christiane Peres.

A reclamação disciplinar foi protocolada no Conselho Nacional do Ministério Público no dia 7 de dezembro pela Advocacia Geral da União (AGU) e pede o afastamento e a substituição do procurador da República Felício Pontes Jr (MPF/PA) nos processos que envolvem a construção de usinas hidrelétricas. O argumento usado é que o procurador “extrapolou suas funções” ao orientar os índios a se posicionarem contra construção das hidrelétricas de Belo Monte e Tapajós.

(Foto © Rebecca Sommer) Felício Pontes chegada, aldeia Xikrin

Segundo a Constituição brasileira – artigo 129 – é função do Ministério Público defender judicialmente os direitos e interesses das populações indígenas. É o que tem feito o procurador federal do MPF-PA Felício Pontes Jr ao esclarecer os indígenas, sempre que solicitado, sobre seus direitos. Mas não é assim que a AGU tem entendido a atuação do procurador. No último dia 7, o órgão protocolou uma reclamação disciplinar no Conselho Nacional do Ministério Público (CNMP), solicitando o afastamento e a substituição de Felício Pontes Jr nos processos que envolvem a construção de usinas hidrelétricas, sob o argumento de que o procurador ultrapassou suas funções ao orientar os índios a se posicionarem contra as barragens de Belo Monte e do Tapajós. Com essa, são quatro representações no Conselho por causa da atuação do MPF/PA em Belo Monte – sendo que duas foram arquivadas e duas ainda tramitam.

O estopim para a reclamação formal foi uma matéria publicada pelo jornal Folha de S.Paulo, no dia 3 de dezembro. A reportagem utiliza, sem autorização, vídeos gravados durante uma reunião do procurador com os Xikrin da Terra Indígena Trincheira Bacajá para embasar sua tese de que Felício sugere aos índios que cobrem mais dinheiro do consórcio Norte Energia pela construção da usina de Belo Monte, no Rio Xingu (PA). Os trechos do vídeo – retirado da internet a pedido do MPF-PA – mostram apenas respostas do procurador a questionamentos da comunidade sobre seus direitos relativos aos procedimentos de indenização por danos causados pela hidrelétrica.

Veja a: carta_de apoio ao MPF dos indigenas Xikrin

(Foto © Rebecca Sommer) Felício Pontes dá explicações aos Xikrin

Mas de acordo com a nota publicada no site da AGU, “o comportamento apresentado pelo procurador da República é extremamente parcial, pessoal e distante do que pode ser considerado como adequado a um membro do MPF para garantir proteção ao meio ambiente e aos povos indígenas, ou para atuar como fiscal da lei”. O documento ressalta ainda que os atos de Felício “promovem insegurança jurídica e social ao incutir sentimento de revolta desmedida, resistência não pacífica e luta ilegal contra a construção de usinas hidrelétricas e, consequentemente, contra quem a promover”.

“Quando a Funai e a Eletronorte vão até as aldeias, com funcionários em grande parte despreparados, e fazem compromissos que não cumprem ou estabelecem uma relação perversa como as ‘listas de alimentos e objetos’, que contribuem para a destruição da cultura desses povos, parece ser normal. Porém, quando um defensor dos direitos indígenas, com compromisso histórico com essas populações, vai ao encontro deles para dias de reunião, os escuta atentamente e os orienta, como advogado dos índios, é visto com estranhamento. Há uma pequena inversão de valores nessa história toda, não?!”, aponta o coordenador adjunto do Programa Xingu, do ISA, Marcelo Salazar.

Vale lembrar que Felício tem uma série de ações que apontam irregularidades sérias no processo de licenciamento de Belo Monte. Até hoje, o MPF já ingressou na Justiça com 13 ações contra a construção da barragem.

(Foto © Rebecca Sommer) Felício Pontes Jr. visitou aldeias do povo Xikrin

Ações de apoio

Dois dias depois da reclamação disciplinar ter sido protocolada no CNMP, uma petição online começou a circular na internet em defesa do procurador e contra o empreendimento no Rio Xingu. Saiba mais.

Além da petição, uma nota em defesa do MPF e de sua liberdade de atuação está circulando entre antropólogos, juristas, representantes da área indígena, igreja, pesquisadores, dirigentes sociais e sociedade civil. A ideia é que em breve este documento esteja também online para juntar forças na defesa do MPF e tornar público o protesto contra a criminalização do procurador Felício Pontes Jr.

Reunião na aldeia – a origem da ação disciplinar

Entre os dias 13 e 15 de outubro, Felício Pontes Jr. visitou aldeias do povo Xikrin do Bacajá (PA) e Mrõtidjãm e ouviu das lideranças uma série de denúncias sobre o desrespeito com que vêm sendo tratadas pelo consórcio Norte Energia (Nesa).

(Foto ©Rebecca Sommer) vista aérea da aldeia Mrõtidjãm

Além da falta de consulta aos indígenas e de informação sobre o empreendimento, os Xikrin reclamaram que acordos estabelecidos entre Nesa e Funai não vêm sendo cumpridos. Um deles é o repasse da verba estabelecida no plano emergencial, firmado entre as instituições. Segundo o acordo, a Nesa deveria alocar R$ 30 mil por aldeia todo mês em mercadorias. As compras deveriam ser feitas pelo escritório do consórcio em Altamira a partir de uma lista fornecida pela Funai, mas os índios relatam que só conseguem acessar esse direito após muita humilhação.

(Foto © Rebecca Sommer) Felício Pontes ouviu denúncias das lideranças Xikrin

“A demora em receber e para levar o material às aldeias retira as lideranças por muito tempo das suas aldeias. Os mantém em Altamira sem necessidade. E os gastos com alimentação na cidade, por exemplo, também saem do recurso da ‘lista’, como ficou conhecida”, relata a antropóloga Clarice Cohn, da UFSCar, que tem acompanhado esse processo com os Xikrin desde os Estudos de Impacto Ambiental, desenvolvidos em 2009, realizando hoje a supervisão antropológica dos Estudos Complementares do Rio Bacajá, com previsão de término em março de 2012.

Os Xikrin denunciaram ainda ao procurador a precariedade do atendimento básico à saúde e o descaso com a educação. “Há algumas semanas, o cacique Onça, um dos mais velhos e importantes do nosso povo foi removido para Altamira porque estava doente. Passou quatro dias no Hospital Municipal São Rafael, sem comida e nenhum atendimento. Quando souberam do caso, seus parentes o encontraram muito fraco e chorando muito, nem conseguia falar”, conta Mukuka Xikrin, uma das lideranças da etnia à frente da Associação Beby Xikrin (Abex).

Condicionantes não foram implementadas

Diversas das ações de saúde e educação são condicionantes previstas pelo Ibama para a instalação de Belo Monte e deveriam ter sido implementadas antes do início da construção da usina. Além das reclamações indígenas, o problema enfrenta outro “complicador”: várias dessas ações são de responsabilidade da prefeitura, Funai, Funasa e o consórcio joga com isso para não cumprir as ações estabelecidas no licenciamento ambiental.

Outro exemplo do descaso foi constatado na visita ao projeto de construção de banheiros nas aldeias Bacajá e Mrotidijam. Além da obra ter sido feita sem observar, nem respeitar a cultura e os padrões arquitetônicos desse povo, o material utilizado para a construção é de “baixíssima qualidade”. “O espaço é pequeno, a telha é de fibrocimento (quente e fraca podendo voar com o primeiro vento forte que vier) e as torneiras, material dos vasos e tanques são quase descartáveis”, observa Marcelo Salazar, que acompanhou a visita do procurador.

Em seus discursos, um a um, os mais velhos das aldeias expressaram indignação com Belo Monte. Eles disseram não querer a barragem no Xingu, pois estão com medo de ficar sem peixe, sem caça e sem água de qualidade para beber, para as crianças brincarem e para tomarem banho.

(Foto © Rebecca Sommer) os mais velhos, aldeia Bacaja

Na ocasião, Felício explicou aos indígenas sobre seus direitos, garantidos na Constituição e na Convenção 169, da OIT, reforçando que eles podem exigir indenização junto à Nesa pelos impactos causados pelo empreendimento. Oficialmente, o EIA não inclui o Rio Bacajá na área afetada pela usina – assim como diz que não haverá impacto em nenhuma Terra Indígena. O MPF, porém, entende que o Rio Bacajá – afluente do Xingu – também sofrerá com a diminuição da vazão das águas por causa da barragem, mas ainda aguarda estudos sobre o comportamento do rio para embasar uma nova ação contra o projeto, a 14ª.

IRONY OVERLOAD: Rebuked by OAS for Not Providing Free, Prior and Informed Consent (FPIC) to Indigenous Peoples, Brazilian Diplomat to Speak at UN Briefing on Indigenous Rights and their Need for FPIC

Thursday, April 28th, 2011

New York, NY (28 April 2011) – The United Nations Department of Public Information (UN DPI) has invited the Mission of Brazil to the UN, to make opening remarks at a briefing for non-governmental organizations on indigenous rights and the need for free, prior and informed consent in mining and development projects. The briefing is in advance of next week’s session of the Commission on Sustainable Development (CSD).

Just three days ago,  Brazil responded officially, albeit not publicly, to the Precautionary Measure issued on 1 April by Inter-American Commission on Human Rights (IACHR) – a body of the Organization of American States (OAS) — on behalf of a dozen indigenous communities of the Xingu River basin. Precautionary Measures are undertaken by the Commission only in serious or urgent situations, to “prevent irreparable harm to persons,” among other reasons. In this instance, the IACHR has called on Brazil to halt the licensing of the megadam Belo Monte project until it has fulfilled its international obligation to engage in free, prior and informed consent and has taken certain specified protective measures.

Specifically, the Precautionary Measure (MC 382-10) requests Brazil to

· perform consultations that are “free, prior, informed, in good faith, and culturally appropriate, with the goal of reaching an agreement…”,

· provide affected indigenous groups with the Social and Environmental Impact Assessment in an appropriate, accessible language,

· adopt “vigorous and comprehensive measures” to protect the lives and personal integrity of the members of the indigenous groups recently observed in voluntary isolation in the Xingu River basin (these groups were observed for the first time only in 2010), and

· adopt measures, also “vigorous and comprehensive,” to prevent the spread of diseases and epidemics which would likely be caused by a massive influx of new population into the area.

The last item is one of particular interest to the indigenous communities and is indeed an urgent request made by them, in addition to measures to protect their territories physically from such an influx of people looking for food, water, wood and places to live.

Despite statements to the contrary by Brazil, and according to both agencies of the Brazilian government the above conditions have not been met.

· All the indigenous peoples that will be affected by the project have not been consulted with. In fact, the United Nations Special Rapporteur on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples has expressed his concern more than once, and specifically noted that the consultation process was carried out in a way such that the indigenous peoples themselves were not able to participate; on the contrary, the consultations took place in urban areas inhabited by people that will not be affected by the project.

· The Social and Environmental Impact Assessment has not been made available in appropriate and accessible languages to all the various groups of indigenous peoples who will be affected.

· Concerning the recently observed indigenous groups still living in voluntary isolation a mere 70 kilometres from the proposed dam site — by far the most vulnerable group — their territory has not even been determined, much less demarcated, and thus none of the appropriate and necessary measures for their physical protection, and to ensure their continued survival, have been taken.

· No attempts have been made to provide the physical protection that might prevent the spread of diseases or epidemics brought in by an influx of population., nor have steps been taken to provide specific measures requested by indigenous groups -such as the posting of guards to protect their territories from the invariable and unwanted influx of newcomers to the area looking for wood, food, water and places to live.

In spite of all the concerns stated by so many actors, including various authorities and experts, the Brazilian Government, in its initial response on 4 April, “noted with astonishment” the measures that the IACHR requested to ‘safeguard the lives and personal integrity of members of indigenous peoples’ supposedly [emphasis added] threatened by the construction of the Belo Monte hydroelectric plant.” The response by the Ministry of External Relations recognizes the need for technical, economic and environmental feasibility studies and for consultations with the affected indigenous communities, and names Brazil’s environmental agency (IBAMA) and its National Indian Agency (FUNAI) as responsible for carrying out these studies and consultations.

At various points in the long history of the Belo Monte Dam project, both IBAMA and FUNAI officials have expressed reservations and have listed numerous conditions that they say must be met before the Belo Monte project could go forward, but which to date have not actually been met, despite the Brazilian Government’s protestations to the contrary. In spite, or perhaps because, of the official approval of the Brazilian Government of the project, at least three officials have resigned, supposedly due to high level political pressure to approve Belo Monte. Two senior IBAMA officials, Leozildo Tabajara da Silva Benjamin and Sebastião Custódio Pires, resigned in 2009, and IBAMA President Abelardo Azevedo resigned in January 2011. Roberto Mesias, a previous president of IBAMA, also stepped down, but pointed to pressure from both sides of the issue — the Government and environmental organizations – as his reason.

The project has been stopped and started more than once. The gravest deficiency noted by many observers is indeed the lack of participation in real consultations based on free, prior and informed consent.

Thus, it is more than a little ironic that Brazil is providing opening remarks at a briefing on the need for free, prior and informed consent and indigenous peoples rights.

VIDEO: BELO MONTE (side event Cochabamba, Bolivia)

Saturday, May 15th, 2010

Side event about the hydroelectric dam BELO MONTE (Brazil, Amazon, Xingu River ) took place April 2010, at the World’s Peoples Conference on Climate Change and Mother Earth Rights, in Cochabamba, Bolivia.
The goal of the event was to build international solidarity to stop the dams in the amazon, and to raise awareness. The Belo Monte Dam would be one of 258 new dams, that Brazil is planning to build in the Brazilian amazon. Belo Monte would be the 3rd largest dam of the world ! Videos by Rebecca Sommer.

VIDEO: part 1
part 2
part 3