Demarcation Issues

The fight between Brazilian indigenous people and the government over the rights to inherited lands continues to rage as slow demarcation and the acknowledgment of their territories continues to take place.

On May 24, citizens packed into a council meeting in the city of Sinop for the latest public hearings. The major concerns they stated were the lack of clear criteria when it comes to demarcation—or the act of creating boundaries around a location. Because of this, organizations of all sizes are worried about the possibility of bankruptcy and isolation.

There are currently more than 70 areas that are being disputed. Current legal provisions give Congress the final say on the demarcations.

According to Congressman Nilson Leitao, there is a feeling that the process of demarcation is misguided. Particularly, this comes from the distrust in the good faith of Funai—the National Indian Foundation in Brazil.

“The boundaries are based on anthropological reports, some fraudulent, which has been proven and its validity even overlaps the Constitution,” Leitao said. “Not only because of the disorderly way that the demarcations have been done, but mainly because of the expedients used, is why we are protocoling this CPI request to investigate what is behind this sudden interest in areas, especially in the Amazon.”

The parliament has announced a national stoppage of demarcation on June 14. This means there will be an increased effort to be heard over the next two weeks. Companies that are interested or currently doing business in the area should partner with lawyers in Brazil to find out how this could affect business operations.

New Partnership

Sharing natural resources is important in any national market, and organizations that produce and maintain these resources must formulate an understanding with those that utilize them. In Brazil, significant steps have been made to increase unity between these two parties, which could have a number of positive effects on the country’s environment and economy.

The International Finance Corporation (IFC) and the Union for Ethical Biotrade (UEBT) have formally partnered together to add significant assistance to various social, environmental, and government organizations. The partnership can help establish new rules pertaining to the access and sharing of benefits resulting from the use of natural, genetic resources like plants and fruits.

Many believe this is a long time coming, as the Brazilian government has been trying for years to establish unity between organizations to ensure that every party is treated fairly without compromising environmental integrity. Debates have raged for 10 years on this topic. While all sides have always agreed that the current regulations pertaining to the usage of natural resources need to be updated, a disconnect between the public and private sectors has prevented the establishment of a strong conclusion.

There is hope that the partnership between the IFC and UEBT will help with this. If so, any organization interested in doing business in Brazil and using its natural resources must stay up-to-date on the latest legal proceedings regarding this issue. Working with lawyers in Brazil can help business owners understand their options, learn the consequences of compliance failure and understand what they must do to follow all rules related to the country’s natural resources.

Brazil’s Amnesty Law

Brazil’s Amnesty Law was passed in 1979 as a way to bring exiled activists back into the country while protecting officials who may have violated human rights prior to 1979 from prosecution. Because the country was ruled by military dictatorship starting in 1964, this was a way to secure officials who served under that regime and clear them of any wrongdoing that may have transpired during their years in service.

While the law has stood in place for more than three decades, its current state has caused unrest among various citizens and political activists throughout the country. In 2010, a case was brought to the Brazilian Supreme Court to modify the validity of the Amnesty Law, which currently protects those charged with torture during the military regime. Many wanted to remove that clause in the law so that those accused of such crimes could stand trial, but the Supreme Court denied the request.

Three months ago, the Bar Association of Brazil (OAB) went to the Minister Luiz Fux, Rapporteur of the appeal of the OAB, asking to be heard. However, before the Supreme Court was able to review and analyze the appeal, the OAB dropped the case. Today, the organization is studying an alternative to a straight appeal, which may have a better chance of making an impact on the Supreme Court.

The OAB believes its actions could force Brazil to comply with a number of international treaties. For example, the Pact of San José, Costa Rica and the Treaty of Rome, of which Brazil is a signatory, are currently being violated by Brazil’s Amnesty Law. At the very least, the OAB is adament that this be amended as soon as possible, so that the country doesn’t perform any illegal international incidents.

The belief is that simple adjustments, which would not require a full appeal, could be enough to change the way some state officials are treated, particularly those involved in crimes that are still ongoing.

Whether changes are made to the Amnesty Law remains to be seen. However, regardless of what eventually transpires between the Supreme Court and the OAB, any individual or organization looking to do business in Brazil will have to obtain a firm understanding of the country’s laws. Lawyers in Brazil can help with this effort by sharing important information regarding any and all Brazilian legal matters.