The president of the STF asked for a review of the appeals against the decision that blocked the time frame thesis
The president of the , minister Edson Fachin, asked for a view on Friday (June 26, 2026) in the judgment of the appeals against the decision that barred the thesis of the time frame for the demarcation of indigenous lands. The minister’s objective is to standardize the understanding of all actions on the subject, so that appeals can be judged jointly.
In the Court, however, there are different types of actions regarding the time frame thesis. Initially, the STF declared the unconstitutionality of the legal thesis as a demarcation criterion. Afterwards, it was necessary to judge the validity of a new law approved by the National Congress that established the time frame. In December, the Court also reaffirmed its understanding, declaring the provisions unconstitutional.
Now, there are appeals arising from the first trial, completed in 2023, with the analysis of the Court’s new considerations, which barred the law in 2025. Minister Fachin is the rapporteur of the extraordinary appeal and Minister Gilmar Mendes, of the actions that questioned the validity of the new law.
The president asked for a view of the trial that began in the court’s virtual plenary session last Friday, stating that a “joint judgment of all related processes in the next virtual session”.
REMEMBER
For the indigenous people only have the right to lands that were in their possession on October 5, 1988, the date of promulgation of the Federal Constitution, or that were under legal dispute at the time.
In September 2023, the STF had decided that the time frame for recognizing occupation of indigenous lands when the Constitution was promulgated. The trial began in 2021.
Congress then reacted. Still in 2023, a which overturned the veto on the time frame and determined that the deadline for recognizing the lands of original peoples would have to be October 5th.
The text was vetoed by the president (PT), but the veto was overturned and the law came into force.
Now, after being questioned by parties, environmentalists and indigenous associations, the Supreme Court recognized the unconstitutionality, returning to the prevailing understanding that the date of promulgation of the Constitution is not a criterion for the demarcation of indigenous lands. It will still be up to the STF to specify deadlines and criteria for land approval.
