Conviction about the time frame meant that Congress did not legislate

The Federal Supreme Court (STF) was faster than the National Congress and decided this Thursday (21) that the time frame for the demarcation of indigenous lands was unconstitutional. The decision accentuates legal uncertainty in the countryside and puts the future of thousands of families at risk. Parliamentarians from the agricultural bench reacted and promised the approval of two constitutional amendments and a bill that clearly establish in Brazilian legislation the validity of the thesis and the payment of compensation to producers who eventually have their lands demarcated.

Following the STF’s decision, the agricultural bench says it can even obstruct votes in the Chamber and Senate so that the agenda can move forward. After the STF’s decision, the FPA will now have to show cohesion and the strength of the largest group in Congress. Once the time frame is overturned, the demarcations must gain momentum and the 226 cases that are in the STF must take into account the definition adopted by the Court.

Since the promulgation of the Constitution, the debate on the demarcation of indigenous lands has been in vogue several times in the National Congress. In particular, with PEC 215/2000, which ended up archived, and later with PL 490/2007 (today PL 2903/2023), of the time frame. However, a decision by the STF in 2009 meant that the proposals on the time frame were not the focus of the agribusiness bench in Congress, as the understanding was that the issue had been pacified.

Rural producers criticized the STF’s decision on the time frame, classifying it as irresponsible. “The STF, under pressure from this current government, is asking for bloodshed. They are throwing lives to death”, said the president of the Agribusiness Association of the Far South of Bahia (Agronex), Mateus Bonfim. They also expressed their disappointment with the agribusiness bench and regretted that parliamentarians let this happen. “Congress left this issue [do marco temporal] run for 35 years”, lamented the president of the Rural Union of Ribeirão Preto, Paulo Maximiano Junqueira Neto.

Conviction about the STF’s understanding of the time frame meant that Congress did not legislate

Convinced that the STF’s decision on Raposa Serra do Sol guaranteed the time frame, parliamentarians from the agricultural bench understood that the issue had been pacified. Although proposals such as PEC 215 and PL 490, for example, addressed the issue in the National Congress, both accumulated setbacks and made little progress until the STF judged the case of Raposa Serra do Sol. “PEC 215 was ready for analysis of the Plenary of the Chamber of Deputies simultaneously with the decision in the Raposa Serra do Sol case. Therefore, when the STF judged the case and consolidated its jurisprudence, starting with Precedent 650/STF, it was understood that the issue was pacified”, stated the technical advice from the FPA.

PEC 215/2000, filed in 2023, intended to include among the exclusive powers of the National Congress the approval of demarcation of indigenous lands and the ratification of those already approved. It also aimed to establish that the demarcation criteria and procedures would be regulated by law. The proposal was approved by the Chamber’s Constitution and Justice Committee in 2012, and by a Special Committee in 2015.

The Raposa Serra do Sol Indigenous Land (IT), considered the largest in the world in continuous area, was approved in 2005, but was questioned by the STF. It was only in 2009 that the Court’s ministers called for the demarcation and immediate removal of non-indigenous occupants.

Along with the decision, 19 conditions for demarcation were presented. Among them the definition that only indigenous lands are those occupied on the date of promulgation of the Constitution and the prohibition on expanding demarcated areas. It is important to remember that four years later, in October 2013, the STF decided, in an embargo, that, although the decision on Raposa Serra do Sol was an important precedent, it was not binding. In other words, it only applied to that specific case, and not to all cases on the same topic.

In 2017, then President Michel Temer approved Opinion 001/2017 of the Attorney General’s Office of the Union, which ordered the Union to follow the STF’s decision on the Raposa Serra do Sol indigenous land in all indigenous land demarcation processes carried out by the federal government. .

However, the judgment of Extraordinary Appeal 1017365, started in 2017, returned to the topic and the ministers recognized its general repercussion. This means that the decision taken in this trial will have consequences for all demarcations of indigenous lands in the country.

“STF usurped functions”, says president of the FPA

The STF’s decision was received with indignation by parliamentarians on the agricultural bench. Senator Luis Carlos Heinze (PP-RS) classified the trial as an act of disrespect. “The daring judgment on the time frame, precisely at the moment when the Senate is analyzing this issue, violates the separation of powers. It is an act of institutional disrespect”, said the senator through his social networks.

Representative Alceu Moreira (MDB-RS) said that the STF’s decision sets a dangerous precedent in property rights. “Those who should look after the Constitution, in fact, generate more legal uncertainty and directly harm the division between powers”.

Still regarding the Supreme Court, the president of the FPA, deputy Pedro Lupion, was categorical in saying that it goes beyond its role in the democratic system. “The STF has positioned itself as a legislator, usurping the functions of the National Congress. We, deputies and senators, are the legitimate legislators. I cannot understand that this is a coincidence. Congress needs to have the right to exercise its role of legislating”, Lupion said. The president also said that the FPA must file a motion for clarification with the STF against the decision on the time frame.

In a change of strategy, FPA will attempt obstruction to guarantee voting on PECs

To resolve the issue of the time frame, the FPA is now focusing on three legislative proposals. The approval of PL 2903/2023, which defines the time frame, is the first step. The proposal was approved in May in the Chamber of Deputies, after 16 years in progress, but it still needs to go through a commission, the Senate plenary and presidential sanction to become law.

According to Lupion, in parallel, the agro bench will be focused on the processing and approval of PECs 132/15, by deputy Alceu Moreira (MDB-RS) and former senator Paulo Bauer (PSDB-SC), which deals with prior compensation on lands used for demarcation, and PEC 48, by senator Hiran Gonçalves (PP-RR), which clearly states in the Constitution that the Temporal Framework of October 5, 1988, the date of promulgation of the Federal Constitution, needs to be fulfilled.

In order for the proposals to be processed quickly, the president of the FPA signaled that the bench could obstruct the work in both Houses. “We will go to extreme lengths for property rights in Brazil. Whoever is saying this is not Pedro Lupion alone. It is the largest and most organized group in Congress, supported by 55 entities that defend rural producers […] I assure you that we will adopt all regulatory strategies to approve the PECs and put an end to this constant dismantling of property rights”, said Lupion.

“Better late than never”, says rural producer about the FPA’s actions on the issue of the time frame

“Better late than never”, was how the president of the Rural Union of Ribeirão Preto, Paulo Maximiano Junqueira Neto, defined the FPA’s reaction to the STF’s decision on the time frame. “We have already been 35 years since the promulgation of the Constitution and people have been in these properties since long before. They are titled and they have public documents, registration […] Now, after around 15 years of discussion, the STF says that the time frame is unconstitutional?”, said Junqueira Neto.

Wilson de Souza, who is the lawyer for farmers who may be affected by the expansion of the demarcation of the Toldo Pinhal Indigenous Land, in Santa Catarina, states that the FPA’s action is late. “Congress was negligent in not legislating on the cause all these years”, stated Souza.

He has participated in discussions about the time frame for at least 15 years. The lawyer also highlighted that, although the proposals supported by the FPA are important, the lengthy process could cause a tragedy until it is resolved. “In fact, no action was taken [até agora]. Just think about the 15 years we’ve been there, seeing this. A legal uncertainty, a terror to the countryside”, added Souza.

The president of the Agribusiness Association of the Far South of Bahia (Agronex), Mateus Bonfim, in turn, said that the STF’s decision was irresponsible. “The STF, under pressure from this current government, is asking for bloodshed. They are throwing lives to death”, said the president of the association. Bonfim also highlighted that producers do not want compensation, but hope to remain on their properties.

According to the president of Agronex, the region in the extreme south of Bahia covers 21 municipalities. In the region, there are around 200 properties that are being studied to demarcate indigenous lands. There are around 50 thousand hectares of productive area that can be demarcated. “We have at least 50 properties here invaded by indigenous people who say they are carrying out self-demarcation,” said Bonfim.