Timeframe: Zanin’s vote attracts government and ruralists – 08/28/2023 – Daily life

Amidst criticism for his first votes in the STF (Federal Supreme Court), Minister Cristiano Zanin’s position on the timeframe became the new focus of attention of the Lula government (PT) and the ruralist caucus.

On the eve of the resumption of the trial, which takes place this Wednesday (30), Zanin has agendas to discuss the subject with Tereza Cristina, senator and former Minister of Agriculture of Jair Bolsonaro (PL), Sonia Guajajara, Minister of Indigenous Peoples , and Jorge Messias, Minister of the AGU (Attorney General of the Union).

The minister appointed by Lula to the STF received criticism from the left after the trial for recognizing homotransphobia as a racial slur and his vote against the decriminalization of drugs.

Last Saturday (26), Zanin took a stand against a lawsuit by Apib (Articulação dos Povos Indígenas do Brasil), which entered the Supreme Court with a lawsuit for the recognition that the Guarani-Kaiowá have been suffering police violence in Mato Grosso do Sul.

The magistrate voted along with Bolsonaro’s two nominees in the STF, Nunes Marques and André Mendonça. The three followed the vote of the rapporteur, Minister Gilmar Mendes.

The group’s position, however, ended up defeated and the action was recognized — a fact celebrated by Apib, an entity that was once directed by today’s Minister Guajajara.

The case judged by the STF, which will serve to establish a reference thesis for all similar processes in the country, concerns the land claim of the Xokleng people in Santa Catarina.

The idea of ​​the landmark, defended by ruralists, intends to consider indigenous territories as those occupied by peoples in 1988, on the date of enactment of the Federal Constitution —thus, not recognizing the right to the xokleng.

The indigenous movement argues that there cannot be a time frame for the demarcation, since the peoples’ right in relation to them predates even the creation of the State and that the Constitution speaks of “traditionally occupied indigenous lands”. Defenders of the text, in particular ruralists, claim that the definition will bring more legal certainty to indigenous peoples and landowners.

The time frame was discussed in Zanin’s diaries with Tereza Cristina and Jorge Messias, this Monday (28), and Sonia Guajajara, on Tuesday morning (29).

Messias will present to the minister of the STF the vision of the AGU, which advocates in favor of the Union, on the thesis.

The AGU disagrees with the vote of Minister Alexandre de Moraes, who in his vote proposed changes in relation to the compensation that should be paid to landowners in places traditionally occupied by indigenous peoples.

Moraes pointed out that, if there is no dispossession (usurpation of possession), physical conflict or judicial controversy on the date of promulgation of the Constitution, the Union should previously indemnify the owner of land located in traditional indigenous occupation, in cash or in agrarian debt bonds.

The AGU is against prior compensation and also defends that the payment should not be the responsibility of the Union alone, but should also be shared with other entities of the federation.

The conversation between them, however, will not be reserved and will also deal with other issues of processes that are of interest to the government. Messias, who has a history of a close relationship with Zanin, is one of those tipped to be nominated for the Supreme Court in the vacancy to be opened by Minister Rosa Weber’s retirement (in September).

Moraes’ vote was the third in the trial and did not follow either the rapporteur, Edson Fachin, who was against the framework, or the second minister to vote, Kassio Nunes, who was in favor.

Moraes took a stand against the framework thesis, but opened a gap for a series of conditions for the demarcation of territories, the most important of which is compensation for the lands to become indigenous property.

The indigenous movement sees Fachin’s vote as the best and criticizes the compensation of territories, because it understands that, in practice, it will make indemnities unfeasible or stop. The Ministry of Indigenous Peoples itself has issued technical notes against this premise.

The ruralists, of whom Tereza Cristina is one of the exponents, defend the framework as an instrument to provide legal certainty to the issue, but see the precedents opened by Moraes positively.

In their view, this position echoes several constraints created in the Raposa Serra do Sol land judgment, in 2009, which created the precedent of the time frame along with a series of devices for the exploration of natural riches in the territories.

---

As the ministers of the STF have already voted on the time frame

Edson Fachin vs.

The rapporteur argues that the right of indigenous peoples to lands predates the creation of the State and that, therefore, it should not be defined by any temporal framework. He recalled that the Constitution defines indigenous rights as fundamental and says that peoples have “original rights over the lands they traditionally occupy”

Nunes Marques, in favor

Indicated by Bolsonaro, he disagreed with the rapporteur and stated, in his vote, that the framework creates legal certainty for demarcations. He followed the understanding created in the Raposa Serra do Sol land judgment, which instituted the thesis for the first time in the Supreme

Alexandre de Moraes, divergent

The minister was against the institution of a timeframe, but opened up the possibility of creating conditions for the demarcation of land —as in the case of Raposa Serra do Sol—, among them, compensation for those who would be left without the area so that the territory be delegated to the indigenous