Brazil’s Supreme Court upholds indigenous rights, rejects temporal milestone thesis
In a historic 9-2 voting victory that resonates deeply with indigenous communities, Brazil’s Supreme Court decisively struck down the application of the temporal milestone thesis ("marco temporal") in the context of land demarcation.Thursday’s session, convened on September 21, marked the 11th installment in a series of deliberations that started in 2021. While the Supreme Court has now rendered its definitive judgment on the temporal milestone thesis, a significant piece of the puzzle remains unresolved. The precise criteria for potential reparations or damages to be paid to landowners who had legitimately acquired the contested lands await definition. Multiple proposals on this crucial matter are under consideration, and the Supreme Court’s approval of a final thesis should only happen on Wednesday (27).The temporal milestone stipulated that indigenous peoples have the right only to the lands they occupied or disputed on October 5, 1988, the date the Constitution was promulgated. The proposal garnered support from ruralists but sent ripples of concern among native communities, who perceived it as a significant impediment to the demarcation of new territories.This ruling carries broader implications, setting a precedent that will reverberate nationwide, affecting other analogous cases. According to the Supreme Court, a minimum of 226 demarcation cases stand to be influenced by this decision. The case at the heart of it all revolves around the expansion of the Ibirama-La Klãnõ indigenous land, home to the Xokleng, Kaingang, and Guarani peoples, located deep within the interior of Santa Catarina state.The victorious group in this pivotal decision comprised Justices Edson Fachin, Alexandre de Moraes, Cristiano Zanin, Luís Roberto Barroso, Dias Toffoli, Luiz Fux, Cármen Lúcia, Gilmar Mendes, and Rosa Weber. Justices Kassio Nunes Marques and André Mendonça faced defeat on the opposing side.Justices Fux, Cármen Lúcia, Mendes, and Weber articulated their positions during Thursday’s proceedings. Justice Fux underscored, "Even in the absence of formal demarcation, these lands must receive protection from the State. In my view, this interpretation aligns most accurately with the Constitution."Justice Cármen Lúcia echoed a similar sentiment, contending that the temporal milestone should not serve as a "determining factor in recognizing traditionally occupied lands."Justice Mendes, the most senior member of the Court, aligned with the majority...
Para continuar a ler
PEÇA SUA AVALIAÇÃO