PGR asks that quilombolas also have the time frame thesis rejected

The Attorney General of the Republic, Elizeta Ramos, asked the Federal Supreme Court (STF) this Tuesday (3) to extend the decision not to recognize the so-called “time frame” for the demarcation of indigenous lands to the remaining quilombola population.

The PGR asks the case’s rapporteur, Minister Edson Fachin, to take the matter to the virtual plenary so that the other magistrates can discuss the case and “immediately establish a thesis rejecting the time frame”, says the prosecutor’s document.

At the center of the controversy is the annulment of a demarcation process in which the National Institute of Colonization and Agrarian Reform (Incra) characterized a rural property as part of an area of ​​quilombola occupation in Mato Grosso do Sul. The state’s Federal Court based the decision on the thesis that only lands occupied until the date of promulgation of the Federal Constitution, on October 5, 1988, could be recognized as quilombolas. The MPF appealed this sentence.

Elizeta Ramos’ position reinforces the arguments presented by the PGR in the previous year, when it highlighted the recent judgment that rejected the “time frame” thesis in relation to indigenous peoples. The attorney general states that this issue is constitutional in nature and goes beyond the interests of the parties involved – with significant social, political and legal implications.

“The possibility of reaffirming the dominant jurisprudence on the same basis in which the general repercussion is assessed arises from the implementation of the understanding established by the Court”, he said in the decision.

The attorney general also stated that although the thesis analyzed by the STF deals only with indigenous territories, “taking into account the conceptual unity of traditional peoples and communities, there is convergence on the premise of rejecting the time frame”. She also refers to an action in which the Court recognized the right of the remaining quilombola populations to territories, even if the land had been titled, establishing that expropriation is preferable to withdrawing the recognition of the territory as quilombola.

“The constitutional protection of original rights over lands occupied by quilombola communities and other traditional peoples does not depend on the existence of a time frame on October 5, 1988 or the configuration of the stubborn expropriation, applying the system of Decree 4,887 for its demarcation. and, where compatible, the guidelines established in the examination of Theme 1031, under the terms decided in ADI 3,239 and ARE 1,360,309”, wrote the prosecutor in reference to appeals in progress.

The case is now in the hands of the STF, which will decide whether to recognize the statement proposed by the PGR.