The Federal Supreme Court (STF) has scheduled for next Wednesday (30) the resumption of the trial of the time frame. The process had been paralyzed since June 7 of this year, when the Court returned to discuss the case, but the analysis was interrupted at the time due to a request for a review by Minister André Mendonça, who had a period of up to 90 days to evaluate the action. The magistrate released the case this Thursday (24).
The return of the judgment marks yet another chapter in the dispute that puts the ruralist wing and indigenous communities on opposite sides, the latter supported by environmentalists and specialists with a guaranteeist profile. The temporal framework thesis consists of the idea that traditional peoples only have the right to territories already occupied or disputed since before the Federal Constitution of 1988.
The reading calls into question land demarcations, the main agenda of the indigenous agenda, not least because it leaves people who have already had their traditional areas formally recognized insecure. Data from the National Foundation for Indigenous Peoples (Funai) show that there are, in the country, 137 areas under study, the initial phase of the administrative demarcation processes. The total number registered by the autarchy of territories that are at some stage of this process or that already have their land duly regularized is 761.
:: Sônia Guajajara hopes that the Senate will review the timeframe and beckon with the negotiation of a new proposal ::
The Articulação dos Povos Indígenas do Brasil (Apib) points out that, as the case has general repercussions, the number of lands that may be impacted by the judgment is more than 1,300. This is because the entity also counts the areas that have not yet entered Funai’s official list because they have not started the administrative process of demarcation. For this reason, the judgment has great scope for traditional peoples.
“It is the judgment of the century for indigenous peoples. We have alerted not only the Supreme Court, but the entire Brazilian and international society about the risks posed by this thesis of the temporal framework. Besides being harmful (for the future), it will set back with the indigenist policy (if accepted)”, says the executive coordinator of Apib Dinaman Tuxá.
The case reached the STF in 2017 and the trial actually began in June 2021, the year in which the rapporteur, Edson Fachin, voted against the time frame thesis. Since then, the scoreboard has also won a vote in favor of the ruralist thesis by Nunes Marques and, subsequently, a vote against by Alexandre de Moraes, who, despite aligning himself with Fachin, presented some specific differences with the position of the rapporteur. . The score is then two against one. In recent years, the case has had the trial postponed several times, which has increased the expectations and anxiety of traditional peoples around the issue.
:: Text on timeframe advances in the Senate despite the government’s nods for dialogue ::
“There is a change in moods, in the emotional, in the psychological. It is what we always put in place. This slowness triggered a series of problems within the indigenous communities, (such as) insecurity per se, because it ended up increasing conflicts. That was what we always warned. We are anxious, apprehensive, and this is general. It is from the Northeast, North to South of the country”, vents Dinaman Tuxá.
The leader points out that, despite the tension of the moment, the segment has good expectations regarding the result. “We are sure that we will be victorious because it is a constitutional right and we believe that the Supreme Court will fulfill its function, which includes the protection of the Federal Constitution.”
the case
The timeframe thesis is analyzed by the STF through Extraordinary Appeal (RE) 1017365, which evaluates the case of the indigenous people of the Xokleng people, from Santa Catarina. Among other points, ruralists argue that the framework would be a way of regulating Article 231 of the Federal Constitution. The excerpt from the Magna Carta points out that “the Indians are recognized for their social organization, customs, languages, beliefs and traditions, and the original rights over the lands they traditionally occupy, and it is incumbent upon the Union to demarcate them, protect and ensure respect for all their assets. “.
“This argument is associated with a possible greater guarantee of legal certainty (for landowners) in the demarcation of indigenous lands. In our point of view, legal certainty also needs to be interpreted along with the original rights to indigenous lands”, opposes the legal adviser Pedro Martins, from the organization Terra de Direitos, who monitors the progress of the process in the STF.
:: After articulation of the ruralist caucus, the time frame for the demarcation of indigenous lands is approved by a Senate committee ::
The theme is also under discussion in the National Congress through the bill (PL) 2903/2023, which legalizes the thesis and creates even other mechanisms rejected by indigenous communities for increasing territorial insecurity, care for the environment and other aspects . The prediction of the return of the judgment in the Court made the ruralist group to speed up the voting of the PL in the last few days, which received the endorsement of the Agriculture and Agrarian Reform Commission of the Senate, but and still needs to face other voting chapters so that it can finally be approved or rejected by parliamentarians.
Editing: Thalita Pires
