BRAZILIAN RAINFORESTS - The New Threat March 96
The indigenous peoples of Brazil have one of the most tragic histories of any of the world's peoples. Since the arrival of the first European invaders 500 years ago, they have seen their lands stolen, their traditions destroyed and their people murdered. More than 80 indigenous cultures have been wiped out in the Amazon since the beginning of this century.
Only recently has real hope appeared for their future. In 1988, in its new democratic constitution, the Brazilian state finally agreed to recognize the rights of its indigenous peoples. 'Decree 22/91' guaranteed Brazilian Indians' permanent rights to land traditionally occupied by them, and required that all these lands be 'demarcated' by 1993. Indians living in demarcated areas have the right to live, free from outside interference, according to their own customs and laws.
Demarcation is not only a question of land rights, it is also one of the best ways to protect the Amazon rainforests. The Indians have the skills, the knowledge and the incentive to preserve the forests they have relied on for their livelihoods for thousads of years.
The 1993 deadline was not met, and 340 of a total of 545 areas identified as Indian lands still await demarcation. But President Cardoso of Brazil publicly committed himself to demarcation, and indigenous groups hoped that the process would be completed, ven if it was slower than promised.
But just as events were moving in their direction, a bombshell has hit Brazil's indigenous peoples.
Decree 22 is being challenged as unconstitutional in Brazil's Supreme Court. President Cardoso, under pressure from powerful forest profiteers and members of his own government, has replaced it with a new law - Decree 1775 - which will work in favour of the ery people who profit from the destruction of the forests.
Loggers, ranchers, miners and other business interests in Brazil have long been opposed to demarcation, and have continued to illegally invade and occupy Indian lands. The present Supreme Court case has been brought by an agribusiness firm occupying the and of the Guarani Indians. The company claims that Decree 22 was unconstitutional because it did not give 'private interests' the right to contest any proposed demarcation.
Decree 1775 means that those who profit from forest destruction will be able to mount legal challenges for ownership of Indian territory.
Decree 1775 could be the biggest single disaster to hit Brazil's indigenous peoples for decades. All Indian lands - even those already demarcated - are now at risk.
WHAT YOU CAN DO
Indigenous groups in Brazil are appealing for international pressure to be put on their government, to safeguard their forests and traditional lands.
1. Please send a message to President Cardoso, sending a copy to the Minister of Justice (see sample letter below). Urge the President to:
* Immediately revoke Decree 1775, and honor his constitutional commitment to demarcation.
* Continue the demarcation process, and complete all demarcations by the end of his own Presidential term in 1998.
* Do whatever is necessary to protect Indian lands from invaders, and immediately expel those illegally occupying Indian lands.
Pres. Fernando Henrique Cardoso
Palacio do Planalto
Brasilia, DF BRAZIL 70064-900
fax: (55-6) 122 67566
email: pr@crdf.rnp.br
Min. da Justi
a Nelson Jobim
Esplanada dos Ministerios
Bloco T
Brasilia, DF BRAZIL
70160-900
fax: (55-6) 122 42448
email: njobim@ax.apc.org
2. If you have time, please also send a letter to the editor of one of your local newspapers (see sample letter and press release). Experience shows that letters to the editor often get the attention of policy makers.
BACKGROUND
What is 'land demarcation'?
Land demarcation is the process of allocating lands to Brazil's indigenous population. It is the principal way the Brazilian government is expected to honor the commitment to indigenous peoples' rights contained in Brazil's 1988 Constitution. The legal prcess of demarcation, originally defined by Decree 22/91, required the Indian agency, FUNAI, to identify lands in which Indians live and work, and which they have traditionally inhabited. Once the borders had been defined, the Minister of Justice signed a ecree ordering demarcation on the ground to take place. The final result had to be approved by the President.
What is Decree 22/91, and why has it been overturned?
Brazil's 1988 constitution guaranteed demarcation of Indian territories, and set a target date of 1993 for full demarcation to be completed. Decree 22, signed by former President Collor in 1991, regulated the terms of the process. A case currently before he Supreme Court, brought by the Sattin agribusiness firm, claims that Decree 22 is unconstitutional, because it does not allow for the "right to contest" ("direito da contradicao") guaranteed by the Constitution. Nelson Jobim, Minister of Justice, agrees and has persuaded President Cardoso to replace Decree 22 with a new law - Decree 1775 - which allows for legal challenges to demarcations.
What does demarcation have to do with the protection of the rainforests?
Once land is demarcated for Indian use, it cannot - legally - be interfered with by outsiders without permission. This means large-scale logging, mining, agriculture or settlement are unlikely to take place. Because most indigenous peoples live small-scale an largely sustainable lifestyles, based on an intimate knowledge of the forests built up over thousands of years, handing stewardship of the forests over to them is one of the best ways to protect the forests.
Does demarcation work in practice?
Demarcation only works if the political will is there. Powerful interests in Brazil are set against demarcation - mainly those, such as loggers, miners and cattle ranchers, who know they will lose out when lands are demarcated. Illegal land invasions by thee hostile interests is the major problem the Indians face. Such invasions have increased sharply since 1988. The best-known case in Brazil at the moment is that of the Macuxi Indians. Their lands have been identified since 1993, but have still not been dearcated. Since then, farmers and gold prospectors have invaded the area, and the army, sent in to expel the invaders, is said to have colluded with them. Up to 80% of Brazil's demarcated areas have been invaded in this way.
What can the Brazilian President do?
Despite the fact that demarcations can now be legally challenged, there is still a lot that President Cardoso can do to ensure Indians are treated fairly and the forests are protected. He is constitutionally obliged to complete the demarcation process as oon as possible - the 1993 deadline has already long passed, and only 39% of identified lands have been demarcated. Furthermore, Cardoso has publicly committed himself to completing demarcation. He also made a public promise that whatever the outcome of theDecree 22 debate, he would try to ensure that lands already demarcated would not be reduced in area.
What other steps are needed to protect the forests?
Within Brazil, the creation of 'extractive reserves' in which only sustainable forestry activities are permitted, coupled with equitable land reform, would go a long way towards protecting the rainforests. On an international level, full implementation ofthe Convention on Biological Diversity - the international treaty which commits governments to identify and regulate the processes which lead to species destruction - to which Brazil is a signatory, would contribute greatly to forest protection. The UN Commision on Sustainable Development has also established an ongoing Intergovernmental Panel on Forests (IPF) which is reviewing existing international forest agreements.
INTERNATIONAL FOREST NEGOTIATIONS
While battles are being waged in all the forest nations to protect specific areas of forest, there are simultaneously two major initiatives underway at the international negotiating level to protect what remains of the world's forests. Here is an update on where they stand.
THE INTERGOVERNMENTAL PANEL ON FORESTS
The UN Commission on Sustainable Development (CSD), which was set up at the Earth Summit in 1992 to review the progress of governments in meeting the commitments they made there, agreed in April 1995 to establish an Intergovernmental Panel on Forests (IPF. Its function is to review all existing international agreements on forests, and to decide whether a new, all-encompassing, international forest convention is needed.
The IPF held its first meeting in September 1995, and it will hold three more before it presents its conclusions to the CSD in 1997.
The IPF is reviewing a wide range of forest issues, which include:
* The effectiveness of existing forest conservation agreements.
* The problems with current forest trade practices and policies.
* The development of international standards and indicators for sustainable forestry practices.
A number of NGOs working on forest issues attended the first meeting of the IPF. Many of them have put proposals for action before the IPF. These proposals include the establishment of protected and sustainably managed forests and a code of conduct for tiber traders. Other issues that NGOs raised included the need for independent certification of sustainably harvested forest products, and the importance of the participation of everyone affected, including local and indigenous communities, in forest manageent schemes.
Key dates:
* 11 - 22 March 1996, second session of the IPF, Geneva, Switzerland.
* 2 - 13 September 1996, third session of the IPF, Geneva, Switzerland.
* Early 1997 (date to be finalized), final session of the IPF, New York, USA.
THE CONVENTION ON BIOLOGICAL DIVERSITY
The Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD) was signed by the world's governments at the 1992 Earth Summit, and came into force in December 1993. Its aim is to protect endangered species and threatened ecosystems, in order to preserve the biological divesity of the Earth. Because forests are some of the world's most biologically diverse ecosystems - tropical rainforests, for example, are estimated to contain at least 50% of all the world's species - the CBD is especially relevant to them. The destruction of orests is one of the major causes of the decline in the world's biological diversity.
Some of the key obligations under the CBD which are particularly relevant to forests include:
* The development of national strategies for the conservation of biodiversity.
* The establishment of protected areas.
* The preservation of the forest knowledge of indigenous and local communities.
At the second Conference of the Parties to the CBD - known as 'COP 2' - which was held in Indonesia in November 1995, governments agreed that the principles which underlie the CBD (the conservation, sustainable use and equitable sharing of the benefits of bioiversity) should also apply to the Intergovernmental Panel on Forests. They also agreed that there should be more dialogue between the CBD and the IPF on issues relating to forests and biodiversity.
At the next meeting of the Conference of the Parties to the CBD - 'COP 3' - in November 1996, governments will try to decide on the specific goals that need to be set to achieve sustainable forestry practices, and maintain the biological diversity of the worl's forests.
Key date:
• November 1996, third Conference of the Parties to the Convention on Biodiversity ('COP 3'), Buenos Aires, Argentina.
•
KEY FACTS & EXPERT SOURCES.
KEY FACTS
• Only 39% of identified Indian lands have so far been demarcated. Over 80% of these lands are estimated to have been invaded by settlers, loggers, gold miners, ranchers or speculators. Since 1988, when demarcation was introduced, invasions have grown mre frequent and more vicious. Murder, rape and torture of indigenous people are frequently documented.
• One of the centerpoints of Brazil's 1988 constitution is the citizen's "right to contest" ("direito da contradicao") government actions. It is this, according to the Minister of Justice, and the current case before the Supreme Court, which makes automtic demarcation unconstitutional.
• Since Cardoso came to power, in 1994, the demarcation of Indian lands has been completely halted, while the debate about Decree 22 takes place. He is now three years behind the 1993 deadline set in the constitution for the completion of demarcation.
• The Brazilian government has negotiated $290 million from the G7 countries for a Pilot Scheme to Conserve the Brazilian Rainforest. The Scheme involves various conservation initiatives, and a large proportion of the money is allocated to speed up the emarcation process. Germany is the major donor, having given over 60% of this money, while the European Union has given 25%. Brazil thus has some responsibility to the outside world to oversee full demarcation.
EXPERT SOURCES:
SOUTH AMERICA
Steve Schwartzman/
Joao Paulo Capobianco
Instituto Socioambiental
Sao Paulo, Brazil
Tel: (55-11) 825 5544
Fax: (55-11) 825 7861
NORTH AMERICA
Beto Borges
Amazon Program
Rainforest Action Network
450 Sansome, Suite 700
San Francisco, CA 94111 USA
Tel: (1-415) 398 4404
Fax: (1-415) 398 2732
Christine Halvorson
Amanaka'a Amazon Network
584 Broadway #904
New York, NY 10012, USA
Tel: (1-212) 925 5299
Fax: (1-212) 925 7742
EUROPE
Fiona Watso
Survival International
11-15 Emerald Street
London WC1N 3QL
United Kingdom
Tel: (44-171) 242 1441
Fax: (44-171) 242 1771
Patrick Anderson
Forests Campaign
Greenpeace International
Keizersgracht 176
Amsterdam, The Netherlands
Tel: (31) 20 523 6245
Fax: (31) 20 523 6200