Group disputes the process of conciliation opened by the STF Minister, who reaffirms the need to protect territory already demarcated
Minister Gilmar Mendes, from (Supreme Federal Court), received on Thursday (15.abr.br.2025) indigenous people of the Munduruku people, from southwest Pará, to deal with the time frame.
At the meeting, which lasted about 30 minutes, the representatives reported the difficulties faced in their territory and the aggressions suffered during demonstrations on the BR-230 highway. They also challenged the temporal framework law and the conciliation hearing held by the minister on the subject.
Mendes is a rapporteur of the actions filed by, and to maintain the validity of the bill that recognized the thesis of the temporal framework and processes in which entities representing the indigenous and governing parties contest the constitutionality of the text.
Last year, in addition to bringing the case to conciliation, Mendes denied the request of entities to suspend the deliberation of the congress that validated Marco, a decision that displeased the indigenous people.
To the Munduruku, the minister stated that the problems reported do not seem to recognize the temporal mark thesis, but of a need to reaffirm the protection of indigenous people who are already in the marked territory.
In a statement, the dean stated that it will take into account the points presented by the Munduruku and stressed that the cabinet remains open to the dialogue.
Understand
Due to the temporal framework, the indigenous people are entitled only to the land that were in their inauguration on October 5, 1988, the date of the promulgation of the Federal Constitution, or who were in court dispute at the time.
In August last year, the (articulation of indigenous peoples) withdrew from conciliation. The entity understood that the rights of indigenous people are unenforceable and there is no parity in the debate.
Then Mendes decided to keep the debates even without the presence of the entity. According to the minister, “no part involved in the discussion can paralyze the progress of the work”.
In December 2022, the National Congress The President’s veto (PT) to the bill that validated Marco. In September, before the congressman’s decision, the Supreme Court decided against Marco. The court decision was taken into account by the Planalto Palace legal team to justify the presidential veto.
