What is at stake in PLP 227/2012? Tuesday, July 16, 2013 Blog PPDS Environmental Policy and Law. Adriana Ramos Paragraph 6 of Article 231 of the Constitution states that: "§ 6 - are null and extinguished, without any legal effect, acts which have as their object the occupation, the dominion and possession of the land to which this article refers, or the exploitation of natural soil, rivers and lakes existing therein, except within the public interest of the Union, according to which it possesses complementary law, not generating the invalidity and termination rights to indemnification or actions against the Union, unless, under the law, concerns improvements derived from occupation in good faith. " Ie, to establish what are the exceptional situations that may restrict the right to exclusive use of the Indians on their lands, Congress must establish a law that complements the Constitution. This law should say what is relevant, important for the public interest of the Union, namely for the National State. In a first attempt to regulate this device, the companion bill 260, 1990, established, for example, as situations within the public interest of the Union, for the purposes set forth in § 6 of art. 231 of the Constitution: a) imminent danger of external aggression, b) serious and imminent threat of disaster or epidemic; c) the need for exploration of natural resources essential to the sovereignty and national development. This bill did not succeed, and even today is an open definition of what is relevant public interest of the Union Taking advantage of this opportunity, congressmen drafted a proposal to another bill that deals with the same subject, legitimizing every kind of use and occupation of indigenous lands and wounding frontally what the Constitution says. The text of the new bill supplement that has the number 227/2012, approved by the Committee on Agriculture of the House of Representatives, is as follows: "Article 1 For the purposes referred to in paragraph 6 of Article 231 of the Federal Constitution, deemed to have been within the public interest of the Union the following acts and facts: I - rural settlements made by the Government, in programs of agrarian reform and colonization, II - the exploration and exploitation of mineral deposits; III - the use of hydroelectric potential; IV - the use and occupation of public lands for the construction of pipelines, pipelines, highways and rail, river and sea ports, airports and transmission lines; V - concessions and sales of public lands located in the strip boundaries, VI - occupations of public land in the range of borders resulting from the formation of settlements, villages and urban settlements; VII - the military training camps and areas for the police and military, armed forces and other security organs 2; VIII - acts which have as their object the legitimate occupation, domain and land tenure private on October 5, 1988. Article 2 is the free movement of vehicles on roads and land transport and waterways that cut indigenous lands, forbidden to charge rates or amounts of any kind. Article 3 is free traffic on indigenous lands, fenced impediment to its performance: I - Armed Forces; II - Federal Police III - the members of the Legislature of the Union, States and Municipalities; IV - servers government agencies related to health and education of the natives. Article 4 The enjoyment of indigenous lands does not override the interests established by the National Defense Policy. Article 5 This law shall enter into force complementing the date of its publication. " In other words, if this bill passes, there will be many exceptions to the right to exclusive use of the Indians on their land that this becomes the exception rather than the rule more. For example, all occupations nonindigenous made before October 1988 (date of enactment of the Federal Constitution) will be legitimized, contrary to what the Constitution says that considers null such securities. If this occurs, there will be no demarcation of indigenous lands in the country, because all focus on lands that someone claims to own or have possession, even if it is vacant land, and rightfully so constituents declared null titles. In addition, the bill allows land reform settlements are made within indigenous lands, playing the landless against the Indians, and freeing up the large estates of land reform. One of the most daunting design is what allows the "granting of public lands in the border area." As 100% of indigenous lands are public (property of the Union), that would mean, for example, that IT Raposa / Serra do Sol and Yanomami, located almost entirely in the border, would be subject to be auctioned to farmers or loggers who wanted to explore the soil or forests. In summary, the project undermines the provisions of the Federal Constitution, which requires rule for implementation of infrastructure important to the country (ports, dams, roads, etc.), and declares as almost any activity likely to settle on Indian lands. Would complete emptying of art.231 of the Constitution, which seeks, in essence, to ensure Indians natural resources necessary for their survival.
Posted on: Mon, 29 Jul 2013 21:18:40 +0000
Trending Topics
Recently Viewed Topics
© 2015