The Senate has accelerated the processing of the PEC (Proposed Amendment to the Constitution) which sets the timetable for the demarcation of indigenous lands, approving, this Tuesday (9), a special timetable to bring the matter directly to the plenary of the House and allow its deliberation expressly on the same day.
The text, which has yet to pass through the Chamber of Deputies (where it enjoys broad support), includes in the Magna Carta the restriction according to which territories must be demarcated solely according to their occupation in 1988. This prediction is criticized by indigenous peoples’ movements and defended by agribusiness.
While the session is already underway, Senator Esperidião Amin (PP-SC) published a new report on the subject, which provides for compensation for farmers, vetoes the expansion of territories and provides for the participation of rural owners throughout the demarcation process.
The vote takes place at a time when Congress is experiencing tensions with the STF (Supreme Federal Court), which also has a session on this step on the agenda this week, Wednesday (10).
The dispute was triggered after Minister Gilmar Mendes decided, in a monocratic manner, to remove from parliamentarians the power to initiate the dismissal of ministers of the Court, limiting this possibility only to the PGR (Attorney General’s Office).
In response, the President of the Senate and Congress, Davi Alcolumbre (União Brasil-AP), presented a series of projects that are sources of tension with the Supreme Court, particularly on the calendar.
The text has been blocked in the Constitution and Justice Commission (CCJ) since July 2024. Thanks to the special calendar, it can go directly to plenary and be deliberated in two rounds at a time – traditionally, the process takes place in two votes, separated by five sessions.
The proposal for a special calendar came from Senator Tereza Cristina (PP-MS) and was approved by 48 votes to 21. The PT, MDB, PSD and the government judiciary opposed the express procedure.
The establishment of the calendar has an impact on indigenous lands which, together, accumulate almost 11 thousand mining requests.
The calendar is the thesis that indigenous territories should be recognized based on their occupation in 1988, when the Federal Constitution was promulgated.
People criticize this idea and argue that the right to territory precedes the constitutional text and that its demarcation must therefore respect the anthropological studies that determine the area originally inhabited by each group.
The Parliamentary Agricultural Front, guarantor of the ruralist group and the most important group in Congress, is the main defender of this monument and had also planned a meeting this Tuesday to debate the issue.
Originally, the text of the PEC had only one provision to provide, in article 231 of the Constitution, which limited the rights of people only to the areas occupied in the “period of October 5, 1988”.
In his latest report, Amin stayed the course “on the date of promulgation of this Constitution”, but vetoed “the expansion (of territories) beyond the limits already demarcated”.
It also included two other provisions, one of them providing for the possibility that the Union would have to compensate rural owners if expropriation of land is necessary, including in cases where the area is occupied by squatters or is classified as bare land, that is, it has never been explored by anyone.
The other provides that the entire demarcation process, carried out by indigenous organizations based on anthropological studies, can be evaluated and includes the participation of municipalities, states and also farmers.
The simultaneous approval in the STF and Parliament reflects what has happened in recent years, also in the face of tensions between the powers.
In 2023, the Supreme Court deemed the thesis unconstitutional. In response, Congress voted and approved a bill establishing this monument.
Once the draft was approved, critics and defenders called on the STF to rescind or approve the text.
It is precisely in this context that the parliamentarians articulated the presentation of the PEC, which received the number 48.
The argument is precisely that the inclusion of the deadline in the text of the Constitution would prevent the Supreme Court from evaluating the thesis as unconstitutional.
At the Supreme Court, the matter was reported by Gilmar, who created a conciliation table to handle the matter.
The minister, a supporter of this thesis, even proposed the regularization of mining on indigenous lands, which is not authorized today, but he backed down.
Today, the STF floated the idea of introducing a new bill to Congress to address this issue. Sessions scheduled for this week in court are intended to debate the issue, but no vote is planned.
About The Author
