Xukuru Human Rights

2011-10-07T17:14:00.001-03:00

American Anthropological Association Committee for Human Rights Letter

Xukuru Letter

Tribunal Regional Federal da 5 Região
Cais do Apolo, s/n
Edifício Ministro Djaci Falcão
Bairro do Recife - Recife - PE - CEP: 50030-908
Telephone: 55 81 3425.9000

Presidente
Des. Federal Luiz Alberto Gurgel de Faria
presidencia@trf5.jus.br
Fax: (81) 3425-9095

Vice-Presidente
Des. Federal Marcelo Navarro Ribeiro Dantas
navarro@trf5.jus.br
Fax: (81) 3425-9499

Corregedor
Des. Federal Manoel de Oliveira Erhardt
teneuman@trf5.gov.br

Des. Federal Francisco de Queiroz Bezerra Cavalcanti
cavalcanti@trf5.gov.br

Des. Federal José Maria de Oliveira Lucena
mario@trf5.gov.br

Des. Federal Rogério de Meneses Fialho Moreira
eso@trf5.jus.br

Dear Judges of the 5th Regional Tribunal:

The Committee for Human Rights is a permanent committee of the American Anthropological Association (AAA), which is the largest professional association of anthropologists in the world. Its purposes are to stimulate informed involvement in the area of human rights among professional anthropologists, and to bring before the Association’s leadership information on urgent, anthropologically-relevant cases of potential human rights abuse. In the context of these roles, the Committee writes to express its concern for the safety, well-being, and fair treatment of Chief Marcos Xukuru, tribal leader of the Xukuru Nation in Pesqueira, Pernambuco, Brazil,[1]. For more than two decades, the Xukuru have been undergoing a process of demarcation of their ancestral lands through FUNAI. Due to the continuing presence of ranchers on Xukuru land, this process has led to ongoing and continual threats and intimidation against human rights defenders and tribal leaders such as Chief Marcos Xukuru (Lôbo 2010; Amnesty International 2010a ).

Since 1992, four deaths have been attributed to retaliation by non-Indian ranchers: Xukuru tribal member José Everaldo Rodrigues Bispo - 1992, FUNAI attorney Geraldo Rolim - 1995, Xukuru Chief Xicão - 1998, and the leader of the village Pé de Serra, Chico Quelé - 2001(. Following the assassination of Chief Xicão on May 20, 1998, his son, Marcos Luidson, was elected as the chief of the Xukuru people. Chief Marcos and his mother, Zenilda Maria de Araújo (a nominee for the Nobel Peace Prize in 2002), began to receive death threats, thus prompting the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights to order the Brazilian government (in October of 2002) to take precautionary measures to protect both of them (Fialho 1992).

Despite these measures, in February of 2003, Chief Marcos Xukuru was ambushed in an assassination attempt in which two un-armed Xukuru youths were killed. The ambush and murders caused anger among tribal members, resulting in the plundering of the cars and houses of the people who instigated and participated in the ambush. This violence could have been avoided if the Brazilian government had provided the necessary security to the area.

While attacks against the Xukuru by the non-Indian ranchers are not new, this incident marks the beginning of the process of criminalization of Xukuru involved in the demarcation process. Since 2003, over 35 criminal charges have been pressed against Xukuru leaders including Chief Marcos Xukuru (Amnesty International 2005c). The accusations against them are based on their status as leaders and no evidence was presented to demonstrate individual responsibility for specific actions. Moreover, in a clear restriction on the right to use all legal means to defend himself, the court declined to hear important witnesses for the defense, including Federal Deputy Fernando Ferro (Workers Party/Pernambuco) and Assistant Head Federal Prosecutor (Subprocuradora Geral da Republica), Raquel Dodge. The exclusion of defense witnesses is a clear violation of Chief Marcos’s guaranteed legal rights.

Despite these irregularities in the legal proceedings, on May 22, 2009, Chief Marcos was found guilty and sentenced to ten years and four months in prison, along with a fine, by the Federal Court in Caruaru, Pernambuco. (Case number 2006.83.02.000366-5).

The presupposition of Chief Marcos Xukuru’s guilt based on his position as a tribal leader is a further violation of his rights. Despite being absent at the place and time that it transpired, the Chief was considered the responsible party in the acts of destruction. His conviction was based on a conflation of his tribal leadership role with a supposed command over the incidents following his attempted assassination.

These developments suggest a broad context of violations of international norms, including the provisions of the Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples, as well as the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, the Convention for the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination, the Declaration on the Right and Responsibility of Individuals, Groups and Organs of Society to Promote and Protect Universally Recognized Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms, and the International Labor Organization Convention on Indigenous and Tribal Peoples (Convention 169).

In light of these violations of the rights of the Xukuru people, we request the following from the 5th Regional Tribunal in Recife, Pernambuco:

* The protection of the fundamental rights of Chief Marcos Xukuru and other tribal leaders
* Fair procedural treatment of indigenous people, based on respect for due process impartiality, and sensitivity to the specific cultural and political context of indigenous communities
* An end to the criminalization of human rights defenders, particularly members of indigenous communities who fight for their right to tribal lands and preservation of their culture
* An impartial, timely, and proper legal and judicial investigation which considers all evidence related to the murders and the attempted assassination of Chief Marcos Xukuru
* If appropriate after impartial and fair review of this evidence, the reversal of the current sentences levied against the Chief and other indigenous Xukuru leaders

Respectfully,

The Committee for Human Rights of the American Anthropological Association

Citations

Amnesty International
2010a Annual Report for Brazil. http://www.amnestyusa.org/annualreport.php?id=ar&yr=2010&c=BRA

Amnesty International
2005b Foreigners in Our Own Land: Indigenous Peoples in Brazil. http://www.amnesty.ca/resource_centre/reports/view.php?load=arcview&article=2350&c=Resource+Centre+Reports. AMR 19/002/2005

Amnesty International
2005c Press Release. Brazil: Safety and survival of indigenous peoples at risk AMR 19/009/2005

Fialho, de Paiva e Souza, Vânia
1992 As Fronteiras do Ser Xukuru: Estratégias e Conflitos de um Grupo Indígena no Nordeste. Dissertação de Mestrado em Antropologia. Recife: (MN/UFRJ) http://www.anai.org.br/arquivos/Dissertacao_mestrado_Xukuru.pdf

FUNAI
1989 o grupo de trabalho para “identificar e definir os limites da Terra Indígena Xukuru”PP Nº 218/89 de 03. 14.89

Lôbo, Sandro
2010 A história do Povo Xukuru. Conselho Indigenista Missionário (CIMI). Personal email communication to Marcia Mikulak, Associate Professor, Department of Anthropology, University of North Dakota. Grand Forks, ND 58201. marcia.mikulak@und.edu

Mikulak, Marcia
2010 University of North Dakota Developmental Leave Research. Personal communication, CIMI

(PCOAS) Permanent Council of the Organization of American States
2006 Committee on Juridical and Political Affairs: Working Group to Prepare the Draft American Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples. OIA/Ser.K/XVI, GT/DADIN/doc.260/06 rev. 1, 18 July 2006

[1] Rede Social 2003 http://www.social.org.br?relatorio2003ingles/relatorio003.htm

PETITION - Stop the Legal Criminalization of the Xukuru

2011-05-09T19:47:00.002-03:00

Please sign the petition to stop the legal criminalization of the Xukuru in Brazil. Your signature does make a difference. Please feel free to post this petition on your Facebook and Twitter accounts: Thanks! Marcia

http://www.petitiononline.com/Xucuru/petition.html

2011-05-09T19:41:00.002-03:00

I received this public declaration regarding human rights and economic progress from Amnesty International today. I'm posting it on my blog after receiving their permission to disseminate it on a variety of social media sites:

ANISTIA INTERNACIONAL

Declaração Pública

Índice: AMR 19/006/2011
6 de maio de 2011

É EXTREMAMENTE PREOCUPANTE QUE SE CONSIDERE SACRIFICAR OS DIREITOS HUMANOS EM NOME DO PROGRESSO ECONÔMICO

A Anistia Internacional manifesta profunda preocupação com as declarações do secretário-geral da Organização dos Estados Americanos (OEA), José Miguel Insulza, em uma entrevista à BBC Brasil, na qual sugere que os direitos humanos dos povos indígenas não devem ser tratados com a mesma importância ou seriedade que a tortura, os desaparecimentos forçados ou outras violações dos direitos humanos ocorridas no passado, e que a Comissão Interamericana de Direitos Humanos (CIDH) deveria "assessorar" os Estados nessas questões em vez de tratá-las como possíveis violações dos direitos humanos.

Também preocupa à Anistia Internacional que tais declarações pareçam sugerir que a CIDH deva rever as medidas adotadas contra o Brasil no caso de Belo Monte, o que constituiria uma preocupante interferência de um órgão político da OEA na autonomia e na independência do sistema interamericano de direitos humanos. Tais declarações lamentáveis se dão num contexto em que vários Estados, principalmente o Brasil, têm tomado medidas que podem ser interpretadas como represálias contra decisões da CIDH que esses países consideram contrárias a seus interesses.

As normas de direitos humanos reconhecidas internacionalmente protegem os direitos civis e políticos, assim como os direitos econômicos, sociais e culturais de maneira indivisível. Além de proibir a tortura, por exemplo, as normas de direitos humanos também protegem as pessoas e as comunidades frente aos novos desafios que se apresentam na região, sobretudo o impacto provocado por projetos de empreendimentos econômicos.

Megaprojetos de infraestrutura, tais como a hidroelétrica de Belo Monte, no Brasil, ou mina Marlin, na Guatemala, podem afetar profundamente os direitos humanos das pessoas e das comunidades. Seu impacto pode ser positivo, como, por exemplo, quando criam postos de trabalho e aumentam a arrecadação fiscal, contribuindo para o desenvolvimento social. Entretanto, esses megaprojetos também podem ocasionar violações de direitos humanos, como quando provocam danos ao meio ambiente, algo que, geralmente, afeta de modo desproporcional os mais pobres e marginalizados. Em diversos países da região, os povos indígenas estão sendo obrigados a abandonar suas terras, perdendo seus meios de subsistência e submergindo na pobreza em consequência direta de projetos relacionados à exploração de petróleo, gás e minérios. Esse risco é ainda mais agravado pela influência crescente que as empresas interessadas em executar tais projetos exercem sobre as instâncias decisórias dos Estados.

Por esta razão, o direito internacional dos direitos humanos elaborou uma série de normas e de mecanismos para proteger os direitos humanos das comunidades locais, especialmente dos povos indígenas. Em 2007, a Assembleia Geral das Nações Unidas aprovou a Declaração sobre os Direitos dos Povos Indígenas, que conta hoje com o apoio da totalidade de seus Estados-membros. Esse instrumento complementa a Convenção 169 da Organização Internacional do Trabalho (OIT) sobre Povos Indígenas e Tribais.

O relator especial da ONU sobre os direitos dos povos indígenas, James Anaya, que dedicou atenção especial ao tema, documentou violações contra os direitos dos povos indígenas e recomendou medidas a serem adotadas pelos Estados a fim de evitar futuras violações. Entre essas medidas está a obrigação dos Estados de promover uma consulta de boa-fé junto aos povos indígenas, antes da aprovação de um projeto, com o fim de obter seu consentimento prévio, livre e informado nas situações em que tal projeto possa afetar substancialmente os direitos desses povos. Esse mesmo padrão foi estabelecido pela Corte Interamericana de Direitos Humanos no caso Saramaka vs. Suriname. A Corte estabeleceu que, em se tratando de projetos de desenvolvimento ou de investimentos em grande escala que possam afetar a integridade das terras e dos recursos naturais do povo indígena em questão, o Estado não tem apenas o dever de consultar o povo indígena afetado, como também de obter seu consentimento livre, prévio e informado, segundo seus costumes e tradições.

A medida cautelar emitida pela CIDH no caso de Belo Monte está de acordo com essa tendência do direito internacional e simplesmente lembra o Brasil de que o país deve suspender as obras do projeto até que as devidas consultas sejam realizadas. A Anistia Internacional manifesta-se preocupada com o fato de o Brasil ter qualificado as medidas como "injustificadas e precipitadas", e de que haja retirado seu candidato às próximas eleições para a CIDH. Igualmente preocupante é o fato de o secretário-geral da OEA não apenas não ter condenado a atitude do Brasil, como ter sugerido que, por se tratar de um projeto de tamanha envergadura em um país como o Brasil, a CIDH deveria examinar a situação com “mais calma”, reavaliando se os direitos dos povos indígenas estariam realmente em perigo. Tal atitude é ainda mais incompreensível quando se considera que um ano atrás, por ocasião da abertura do 138º período de sessões da CIDH, e em clara alusão aos ataques dirigidos por outro país à autoridade e legitimidade da CIDH, o mesmo secretário-geral da OEA enfatizou a necessidade de se "acatar" as decisões da OEA a fim de fortalecer essa instituição de direitos humanos, afirmando que isso requer também um “diálogo permanente” com o organismo.

O escrutínio internacional da situação interna dos direitos humanos nunca é agradável para os países envolvidos. Porém, os Estados criaram a Comissão Interamericana como órgão principal e autônomo da OEA porque compreenderam a importância de existirem órgãos competentes e independentes para supervisionar o cumprimento das obrigações de direitos humanos que tais Estados voluntariamente adotaram. Segundo a Convenção Americana de Direitos Humanos, os membros da CIDH são eleitos pelos próprios Estados-membros da OEA, em sua Assembleia Geral, sendo eles pessoas de "alta autoridade moral e reconhecido saber em matéria de direitos humanos" (artigo 34), os quais servem à Comissão "em caráter pessoal" (artigo 36.1).

A atitude do Estado brasileiro frente à medida cautelar emitida pela CIDH no caso Belo Monte compromete a força e a efetividade de um sistema que historicamente tem demonstrado ser um elemento catalisador da efetiva proteção dos direitos humanos na região. O sistema de proteção regional deixou de questionar os abusos dos governos ditatoriais e passou a fazer advertências sobre as falhas estruturais e os abusos que ocorrem nas democracias. Os novos desafios de direitos humanos, sobretudo com relação a projetos de desenvolvimento econômico, devem ser encarados com a mesma seriedade que os demais.

Nas últimas décadas, o Continente Americano tem avançado em matéria de proteção dos direitos humanos. Porém, mesmo com esses avanços, ainda falta muito para que os direitos dos mais pobres e marginalizados sejam protegidos. A proteção dos direitos humanos e a promoção do desenvolvimento econômico não se excluem mutuamente, e sua harmonização se constitui em um dos maiores desafios da região. É fato que as normas de proteção dos direitos humanos se refletem cada vez mais nas políticas e nos parâmetros que norteiam os empréstimos das instituições financeiras internacionais.

Seria extremamente preocupante que se estivesse considerando sacrificar os direitos humanos dos povos indígenas e de outros grupos vulneráveis em nome do desenvolvimento econômico. A Anistia Internacional exorta todos os governos da região, e os funcionários nomeados por tais governos para servirem no sistema regional, a se comprometerem publicamente com a proteção de todos os direitos humanos, especialmente nos projetos de desenvolvimento, e a cumprirem, de boa-fé, as recomendações e as sentenças do sistema interamericano de direitos humanos.

UNDRIP & UNDHR

2011-05-09T11:19:00.003-03:00

UNDRIP & UNDHR

Written by: Marcia Mikulak - Associate Professor, UND 11-5-2010 ©

The United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples is the only human rights document drafted with the participation of the peoples it seeks to serve; Indigenous peoples of the world. The document specifically outlines the self-identified needs Indigenous peoples deem fundamental: “ our right of self-determination, our right to own and control our lands, territories and resources, our right to free, prior and informed consent, among others” and is a response to”... the cries and complaints brought by indigenous peoples before the UN Working Group on Indigenous Populations (WGIP)” A majority of 144 member states voted in favor of indigenous human rights, while 4 member states voted against them (Australia, Canada, New Zealand and the United States). Eleven member states abstained (Azerbaijan, Bangladesh, Bhutan, Burundi, Colombia, Georgia, Kenya, Nigeria, the Russian Federation, Samoa, and Ukraine).

(Watch UN video on the WGIP - cut and paste this link into your browser - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n-Z-FzCJ6-Y)

Since its adoption, Australia and New Zealand have reversed their positions and now endorse the Declaration. Colombia and Samoa have also reversed their positions and indicated their support for the Declaration. In March 2010, the Government of Canada announced it would take steps to endorse the UN Declaration. In April 2010, the United States has indicated that it will review its position regarding the declaration.

President of the UN General Assembly Sheikha Haya Rashed Al Khalifa stated in 2007:

"“even with this progress, indigenous peoples still face marginalization, extreme poverty and other human rights violations. They are often dragged into conflicts and land disputes that threaten their way of life and very survival; and, suffer from a lack of access to health care and education.” http://www1.umn.edu/humanrts/edumat/studyguides/indigenous.html
Indigenous people are defined as:

…those which having a historical continuity with pre-invasion and pre-colonial societies that developed on their territories, consider themselves distinct from other sectors of societies now prevailing in those territories, or parts of them. They form at present non-dominant sectors of society and are determined to preserve, develop, and transmit to future generations their ancestral territories, and their ethnic identity, as the basis of their continued existence as peoples, in accordance with their own cultural patterns, social institutions and legal systems.
Indigenous Peoples worldwide number between:
• 300-500 million
• Embody and nurture 80% of the world’s cultural and biological diversity, and
• Occupy 20% of the world’s land surface.

The Indigenous Peoples of the world are very diverse:

• They live in nearly all the countries on all the continents of the world
• Form a spectrum of humanity, ranging from traditional hunter-gatherers and subsistence farmers to legal scholars
• In some countries, Indigenous Peoples form the majority of the population; others comprise small minorities.
• Indigenous Peoples are concerned with preserving land, protecting language, and promoting culture, and ensuring their place in the world as viable, active, social actors involved in the decisions affecting all peoples in this globalized world.
• Some Indigenous Peoples strive to preserve traditional ways of life, while others seek greater participation in the current state structures.
• Like all cultures and civilizations, Indigenous Peoples are always adjusting and adapting to changes in the world.
• Indigenous Peoples recognize their common plight and work for their self-determination (The right to the formation of a cohesive national group (“peoples”) living in a territory, and to choose for themselves a form of political and legal organization for that territory), based on their respect for the earth.
• Despite such extensive diversity in Indigenous communities throughout the world all Indigenous Peoples have one thing in common:
• They all share a history of injustice. Indigenous Peoples have been killed, tortured and enslaved.
• In many cases, they have been the victims of genocide.
• They have been denied the right to participate in governing processes of the current state systems.
• Conquest and colonization have attempted to steal their dignity and identity as indigenous peoples, as well as the fundamental right of self-determination (The right of a cohesive national group (“peoples”) living in a territory to choose for themselves a form of political and legal organization for that territory.)

Associação Americana de Antropologia - Comitê dos Direitos Humanos: Carta dos Xukuru

2011-05-09T11:04:00.002-03:00

A carta da Associação Americana de Antropologia - O Comité dos Direitos Humanos em portuguese.

9 de fevereio, 2011

Caros juízes do 5º Tribunal Regional:

O Comité dos Direitos Humanos é uma comissão permanente da Associação Americana de Antropologia (AAA), que é a maior associação profissional de antropólogos do mundo. Seus objetivos são estimular a participação informativa na área dos direitos humanos entre os antropólogos profissionais, e trazer estas informações para Associações de lideranças casos antropologicamente urgentes e relevantes de potencial abuso dos direitos humanos. No âmbito dessas funções, o Comité escreve para expressar sua preocupação com a segurança, o bem-estar, e um tratamento justo do cacique Marcos Xukuru, líder tribal da Nação Xukuru, em Pesqueira, Pernambuco, Brasil, [1]. Por mais de duas décadas, os Xukuru foram submetidos a um processo de demarcação de suas terras ancestrais por meio da Funai. Devido à contínua presença de fazendeiros em terra Xukuru, esse processo levou à constantes e contínuas ameaças e intimidação contra os defensores dos direitos humanos e líderes tribais, tais como o cacique Marcos Xukuru (Lobo, 2010; Anistia Internacional 2010a).

Desde 1992, quatro mortes foram atribuídas à retaliação por fazendeiros: o Xukuru José Everaldo Rodrigues Bispo - 1992, o procurador da Funai Geraldo Rolim - 1995, cacique Xicão Xukuru - 1998, e o líder da aldeia Pé de Serra, Chico Quelé - 2001 (Após o assassinato do Chefe Xicão em 20 de maio de 1998, seu filho, Marcos Luidson, foi eleito como o chefe do povo Xukuru, o cacique Marcos e sua mãe, Zenilda Maria de Araújo (que foi indicada para o Prêmio Nobel da Paz em 2002), começou a receber ameaças de morte, levando a Comissão Interamericana de Direitos Humanos a solicitar o governo brasileiro (em outubro de 2002) que se tome medidas de precaução para proteger os dois (Fialho, 1992).

Apesar destas medidas, em fevereiro de 2003, o cacique Marcos Xukuru sofreu uma emboscada na tentativa de seu assassinato no qual dois jovens Xukuru desarmados foram mortos. A emboscada e os assassinatos causaram indignação entre os membros da tribo, o que resultou na destruição de carros e casas das pessoas que promoveram e participaram da emboscada. Essa violência poderia ter sido evitado se o governo brasileiro tivesse fornecido a segurança necessária para a área.

Embora ataques contra os Xukuru pelos fazendeiros não sejam novidades, este incidente marcou o início do processo de criminalização dos Xukuru envolvidos no processo de demarcação das terras indígenas. Desde 2003, os lideres Xucuru vem sofrendo com mais de 35 acusações criminais, incluindo está contra o cacique Marcos Xukuru (Anistia Internacional, 2005c). Está última acusações é baseadas em sua condição de líder e nenhuma evidência foi apresentada para demonstrar a responsabilidade individual para as ações específicas. Além disso, em uma clara restrição ao direito de usar todos os meios legais para se defender, o tribunal se recusou a ouvir testemunhas importantes para a defesa, incluindo o deputado federal Fernando Ferro (PT / PE) e Chefe Assistente do Ministério Público Federal (Subprocuradora Geral da Republica ), Raquel Dodge. A exclusão das testemunhas de defesa é uma clara violação da garantia dos direitos legais do cacique Marcos.

Apesar destas irregularidades no processo judicial, em 22 de Maio de 2009, o cacique Marcos foi considerado culpado e condenado a dez anos e quatro meses de prisão, juntamente com uma multa, pela Justiça Federal em Caruaru, Pernambuco. (processo número 2006.83.02.000366-5).

O pressuposto da culpa cacique Marcos Xukuru, baseada em sua posição como um líder tribal é mais uma violação dos seus direitos. Apesar de estar ausente no local e no tempo que transcorreu, o cacique foi considerado o responsável nos atos de destruição. Sua condenação foi baseada em uma fusão de seu papel de liderança tribal com o suposto comando sobre os incidentes após a tentativa de seu assassinato.

Esses desenvolvimentos sugerem um amplo contexto de violações das normas internacionais, incluindo as disposições da Declaração sobre os Direitos dos Povos Indígenas, bem como a Declaração Universal dos Direitos Humanos, o Pacto Internacional sobre Direitos Civis e Políticos, a Convenção para a Eliminação de Todas as Formas de Discriminação Racial, a Declaração sobre o Direitos e os Deveres dos Indivíduos, Grupos e Órgãos da Sociedade de Promover e Proteger os Direitos Humanos e Liberdades Fundamentais, e a Convenção da Organização Internacional do Trabalho sobre Povos Indígenas e Tribais (Convenção 169).

Diante dessas violações dos direitos do povo Xukuru, solicitamos que o 5 º Tribunal Regional em Recife, Pernambuco, tomem as seguintes orientações:

* A proteção dos direitos fundamentais do cacique Marcos Xukuru e outros líderes tribais
* Justo tratamento processual dos povos indígenas, baseada no respeito à imparcialidade do devido processo, e sensibilidade ao contexto cultural e político das comunidades indígenas
* O fim da criminalização dos defensores dos direitos humanos, especialmente os membros das comunidades indígenas que lutam por seu direito à terras tribais e preservação da sua cultura
* Uma investigação imparcial, rápida, juridicamente coerente que considere provas importantes, discutidos nesta carta, relacionadas com os homicídios e tentativa de assassinato do cacique Marcos Xukuru, que não foram admitida como prova pela defesa.
* Se for o caso, após o exame imparcial e justo destas evidências, a inversão da condenação feita contra cacique e outros líderes indígenas Xukuru.

Respeitosamente,

O Comité dos Direitos Humanos da Associação Americana de Antropologia

Citações
Amnesty International
2010a Annual Report for Brazil. http://www.amnestyusa.org/annualreport.php?id=ar&yr=2010&c=BRA
Amnesty International
2005b Foreigners in Our Own Land: Indigenous Peoples in Brazil. http://www.amnesty.ca/resource_centre/reports/view.php?load=arcview&article=2350&c=Resource+Centre+Reports. AMR 19/002/2005
Amnesty International
2005c Press Release. Brazil: Safety and survival of indigenous peoples at risk AMR 19/009/2005
Fialho, de Paiva e Souza, Vânia
1992 As Fronteiras do Ser Xukuru: Estratégias e Conflitos de um Grupo Indígena no Nordeste. Dissertação de Mestrado em Antropologia. Recife: (MN/UFRJ) http://www.anai.org.br/arquivos/Dissertacao_mestrado_Xukuru.pdf
FUNAI
1989 o grupo de trabalho para “identificar e definir os limites da Terra Indígena Xukuru”PP Nº 218/89 de 03. 14.89
Lôbo, Sandro
2010 A história do Povo Xukuru. Conselho Indigenista Missionário (CIMI). Personal email communication to Marcia Mikulak, Associate Professor, Department of Anthropology, University of North Dakota. Grand Forks, ND 58201. marcia.mikulak@und.edu
Mikulak, Marcia
2010 University of North Dakota Developmental Leave Research. Personal communication, CIMI
(PCOAS) Permanent Council of the Organization of American States
2006 Committee on Juridical and Political Affairs: Working Group to Prepare the Draft American Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples. OIA/Ser.K/XVI, GT/DADIN/doc.260/06 rev. 1, 18 July 2006

American Anthropological Association Letter of Support for the Xukuru People

2011-05-09T10:45:00.003-03:00

GREAT NEWS!!! - On February 9th, 2011 the American Anthropological Association's Committee for Human Rights has passed a letter in support of opposing the criminalization of the Xukuru. The letter has been sent to the 5th Regional Tribunal in Recife that is currently reviewing the 2009 court decision finding Cacique Marcos Xukuru and 35 other Xukuru leaders guilty of inciting a riot after the unsuccessful assassination attempt on the life of Cacique Marcos Xukuru. Cut and paste the link below in your browser to read the letter. Celebrate with us by signing the petition to stop the legal criminalization of the Xukuru (http://www.petitiononline.com/Xucuru/petition.html.

American Anthropological Association Letter to the 5th Regional Tribunal in Recife, Pernambuco, Brazil: http://www.aaanet.org/cmtes/cfhr/Xukuru-Letter.cfm

Marcia Mikulak

International Indigenous Human Rights Class

2010-02-03T11:22:00.002-03:00

I would like to go back to early readings you did for the first class this semester. On page 3 in HRSJ, the author discusses the contents of each chapter and provides some background information for why they consider these topics essential to this textbook. Please do some quick research (basic, simple, web-based inquiry looking for constitutions in English for Iran, Brazil, India, and or Pakistan). Choose one of these countries and compare their constitution to the US constitution answer the following two questions and post your response on this blog:

1. What rights are citizens granted (social, political, economic, cultural etc.) in the current constitution (of the country you chose). Is the country you choose a signatory to the UNDHR? If not, can you identify why based on your reading of its constitution?

2. How does the current US constitution and social order adhere to the basic human rights principles as outlined in the preface and introduction to HRSJ? How does it not adhere to basic human rights principles as outlined in the UNDHR?

Cacique Marcos Xukuru - Group Meeting for Remembering Retomadas (re-taking of land) and for re-mapping of Indian territories 11-09

2010-02-01T18:08:00.001-03:00

Marcia Mikulak

Associate Professor

Anthropologh Department

University of North Dakota

Grand Forks, ND 58202-8374

701-777-0718 Office

701-330-1311 Cell

http://www.und.edu/dept/anthro/Dr_Mikulak.html

www.twitter.com/xukurutwit

www.facebook.com/marcia.mikulak

www.youtube.com/marciamikulak

To the US and Back to Pernambuco

2010-02-01T14:53:00.004-03:00

I haven't posted in a while, but I've been very busy reaching out to a variety of individuals and organizations in the US who can assist in reviewing the legal case of Cacique Marcos Xukuru, and assist us in our push to put pressure on the 5th Regional Tribunal in Recife to reverse his 10 year and 4 month prison sentence.

While in the US during December, I contacted The American Anthropological Association and passed on information about the human rights abuses endured by the Xukuru for more than 30 years (not to mention colonial attempts at eradication. The AAA has agreed to review Marco's case. If they find in favor of assisting Marcos, they will be a very valuable addition to our list of organizations supporting the reversal of his sentence, and also in support of indigenous human rights in Brazil.

In addition, I also spoke with the Indian Law Review Center in Washington, DC regarding the Xukuru fight for land and human rights. They also agreed to review the history of human rights abuses against the Xukuru up to and including Marco's case. Their advocacy and legal assistance will be invaluable to Marcos and his legal team here in Brazil.

If any human rights lawyers are reading this blog, I would love to hear from you in order to share more detailed legal documents from the 2009 trial that reveal the absence of due process for Marcos and demonstrate judicial bias. I'll be posting some of the trial data (in Portuguese) soon.

VID 00018-20091015-1312.3GP

2009-10-19T15:11:00.001-03:00

Xukuru - Dancing the Tore (a ritual process with a variety of purposes and meanings). See Blog for more information.

This message was sent using the Picture and Video Messaging service from Verizon Wireless!

To learn how you can snap pictures and capture videos with your wireless phone visit www.verizonwireless.com/picture.

Note: To play video messages sent to email, QuickTime� 6.5 or higher is required.

Gaining Ground on Legal Assistance

2009-10-19T13:42:00.002-03:00

Good news - we're gaining some ground on finding US lawyers who work in international indigenous human rights that are willing to support the Xukuru’s struggle to gain their human rights. The lawyers will assist in the current appeals to reverse the sentence of 10 years and 4 months levied against Cacique Marcos Xukuru , and various other sentences given to 31 Xukuru tribal members and village leaders. This is exciting news, brought to me by Joseph Mandala (my research assistant). Thanks to Joseph's hard work, we hope to have several US lawyers working with international human rights documents to identify specific areas where the Brazilian legal system is non-compliant as signatories. Will keep you posted on the ways in which such documents can be very useful, and hopefully, successful.

Here are links to the 2007 United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples:

http://www2.ohchr.org/english/issues/indigenous/declaration.htm

* The UN Declaration was adopted by a majority of 143 states in favor, 4 votes against (Australia, Canada, New Zealand and the United States) and 11 abstentions (Azerbaijan, Bangladesh, Bhutan, Burundi, Colombia, Georgia, Kenya, Nigeria, Russian Federation, Samoa and Ukraine).

* The Declaration establishes a universal framework of minimum standards for the survival, dignity, well-being and rights of the world's indigenous peoples. The Declaration addresses both individual and collective rights; cultural rights and identity; rights to education, health, employment, language, and others. It outlaws discrimination against indigenous peoples and promotes their full and effective participation in all matters that concern them. It also ensures their right to remain distinct and to pursue their own priorities in economic, social and cultural development. The Declaration explicitly encourages harmonious and cooperative relations between States and indigenous peoples.

http://daccessdds.un.org/doc/UNDOC/GEN/N06/512/07/PDF/N0651207.pdf?OpenElement

*English version of United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples

http://www.hreoc.gov.au/social_justice/declaration/declaration_QA_2009.html

*This is an interesting read - it's a web page from the Australian Human Rights Commission that offers a "Q&A" on the UN Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples. As one of the four countries (Australia, Canada, New Zealand, & the US) opposed to the adoption of the UN Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples, this page offers a discussion on the issues that continue to produce miss-information about indigenous peoples and their rights.

Questions:

• Which human rights abuses experienced by the Xukuru can you identify in the General Assembly’s Resolutions? In the 46 Articles of the UN Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples?

• How would you discuss the issues and present them is such a way as to demonstrate how the Brazilian Nation-State has abused the basic human rights of the Xukuru as outlined in this document?

These are two of the questions we must answer in ways that convince the Regional Federal Tribunal of the 5th region (Pernambuco, Brazil) which is reviewing current appeals to reverse the Federal Courts’ decision to sentence Cacique Marcos Xukuru to 10 years and 4 months in prison (see discussions in earlier blogs about the attempted assassination of Cacique Marcos Xukuru and other abuses). Your suggestions could add to our success.

Good Web Page

2009-10-19T13:35:00.004-03:00

http://assinexukuru.blogspot.com/2009_06_01_archive.html
This web page is in Portuguese. For those who read Portuguese, several petitions/letters in support of the Xukuru are posted here.

IMG00063-20091015-1322.jpg

2009-10-19T13:35:00.001-03:00

Jacinaiara - Young Xukuru Child - 4 years old

This message was sent using the Picture and Video Messaging service from Verizon Wireless!

To learn how you can snap pictures and capture videos with your wireless phone visit www.verizonwireless.com/picture.

Note: To play video messages sent to email, QuickTime� 6.5 or higher is required.

IMG00047-20091010-1522.jpg

2009-10-11T03:27:00.001-03:00

The Fish Dinner

This message was sent using the Picture and Video Messaging service from Verizon Wireless!

To learn how you can snap pictures and capture videos with your wireless phone visit www.verizonwireless.com/picture.

Note: To play video messages sent to email, QuickTime� 6.5 or higher is required.

IMG00044-20091010-1457.jpg

2009-10-11T01:02:00.001-03:00

Fish booth in Olinda

This message was sent using the Picture and Video Messaging service from Verizon Wireless!

To learn how you can snap pictures and capture videos with your wireless phone visit www.verizonwireless.com/picture.

Note: To play video messages sent to email, QuickTime� 6.5 or higher is required.

IMG00030-20091005-1814.jpg

2009-10-09T19:02:00.000-03:00

Olinad at night

This message has been sent using the picture and Video service from Verizon Wireless!

To learn how you can snap pictures and capture videos with your wireless phone visit www.verizonwireless.com/picture.

Note: To play video messages sent to email, Quicktime@ 6.5 or higher is required.

IMG00024-20091001-1719.jpg

2009-10-09T18:51:00.001-03:00

Rua da Pilla - street where I live in Olinda

This message was sent using the Picture and Video Messaging service from Verizon Wireless!

To learn how you can snap pictures and capture videos with your wireless phone visit www.verizonwireless.com/picture.

Note: To play video messages sent to email, QuickTime� 6.5 or higher is required.

IMG00022-20091001-1717.jpg

2009-10-09T03:02:00.001-03:00

My House on Rua da Pallia

This message has been sent using the picture and Video service from Verizon Wireless!

To learn how you can snap pictures and capture videos with your wireless phone visit www.verizonwireless.com/picture.

Note: To play video messages sent to email, Quicktime@ 6.5 or higher is required.

The View From the Latifundista

2009-10-06T18:28:00.011-03:00

Much has been written about Brazil's colonial practices and treatments of indigenous peoples. One article, written in the 1980s by Suzanne Williams, (“ Land Rights and the Manipulation of Identity: Official Indian Policy in Brazil,” published in the Journal of Latin American Studies, Vol. 15, No. 1 May, 1983, pp. 137-161) is particularly interesting, since the discussion she presents about land rights and indigenous identity are still relevant today. I recommend that those interested in an overview of the history of Brazil's relations and treatment of indigenous peoples read this article. The following incident reflects Williams' historical review on the treatment of Brazil's indigenous peoples within the nation-state.

Interestingly, after spending time with Cacique Marcos and other members of the Xukuru, I had the opportunity to have an in-depth talk with a disenfranchised latifundiário (used-to-be owner of a large fazenda /farm). My opportunity came when my computer suddenly stopped working, and I was put in touch with Mr. X via my current landlady.

While working on my computer over the next two days, I had the opportunity to listen to the perspective of an X-latifundiário (X-farmer who inherited large tracts of land that had been in his family since the era of slavery). Mr. X offered his opinions after I asked him what he thought about the situation of the Xukuru in Peisquiera. I was somewhat taken back at first by his strong and determined perspectives of the Xukuru, but I also welcomed his perspectives. It was like watching an edited and polished film, with a well thought out script, completely logical and defensible. Here's a summary of what I heard.

Mr. X confided in me that the situation with the Xukuru was very difficult, and very sad. He told me his family land holdings went all the way back to the great latifúndio period, and that the land they owned was extensive. His land, lost to the indigenous Xukuru through government land re-demarcation due to extensive activism through a process of retornando (retaking of land by indigenous peoples who camp on and refuse to leave lands they identify as traditional tribal territories), was productive and well cared for. Cattle were raised for beef and milk production, and when the Xukuru emerged in the early 1980s, declaring themselves to be an indigenous tribe, the problems began to mount up for him. He said that Xicão Xukuru, the assassinated Xukuru chief and father of Cacique Marcos Xukuru, was not an Indian. He had green eyes, like a snake, and he was dark skinned like most of the men from the sertão (dry back-country). According to Mr. X and his fellow land owners (and politicians), it was Xicão Xukuru who fabricated the Xukuru tribe, and hired a well known lawyer to legally create their indigenous status. Once the tribe was designated as real and living by the Brazilian government, then the processes of land re-demarcation could begin. Xicão Xukuru, according to Mr. X was a handsome man with a lot of charisma, but he was not an Indian.
According to Mr. X, the Xukuru, like all indigenous peoples, are corrupt and live in groups that are constantly engaged in in-fighting amongst themselves. I was told to not trust any of them, and to be very careful, because it was dangerous business being in close contact with them. Here's why – according to Mr. X, the Xukuru were responsible for creating the riot that occurred in 2003 when the attempted assassination of Cacique Marcos occurred. In fact, the attempt on Marcos' life was not by a hired assassin, but by one of his own people, and the attempted murder was based on a long-standing dispute between relatives. Indeed, according to Mr. X, the Xukuru people are divided about their leader. According to Mr. X, the majority of the Xukuru do not have confidence in their Cacique. Again, accdording to Mr. X, Marcos has the protection of hired thugs (Military Police) who accompany him everywhere, and he flaunts his assumed power whenever he comes into town. Apparently, the Xukuru were instigated, by Marcos, to create the riot in the city of Pesquiera after the "false" assassination attempt on his life, braking windows, burning buildings, and trashing a large section of the city. According to Mr. X, it was Marcos who was responsible for this violence. In many ways, Mr. X’s account is very similar to the Federal Police report about the events occurring on the day and evening of the attempted assassination of Cacique Marcos Xukuru. Many NGOs and human rights organizations are lobbying for the district courts to re-investigate his case and listen to witnesses that were not permitted to testify during his trial (see petition on this web page to stop the legal criminalization of the Xukuru).

According to Mr. X, many claims for land re-demarcation by Indians are false, and the lands are left undeveloped and unproductive when they have legal custody of their land. Hey, he said, the Xukuru didn't even know they were Indians until Xicã0 Xukuru told them they were! Many indigenous tribes in Brazil speak about having to re-learn their indigenousness since they were forbidden for centuries from practicing their traditional cultures.

What is interesting about Mr. X’s account, is that his account of events that night are reflected in his views of indigenous peoples in general. His perspectives are informed by his social position and class inheritance. His story follows the well researched history of the nation-states position on indigenous peoples in Brazil, that is, the perspective of wealthy land-owners and their political affiliations. The article mentioned above by Suzanne Williams perfectly unfolds, layer by layer, the constructed social reality of Mr. X.

PLEASE SIGN THIS PETITION TO STOP THE CRIMINALIZATION OF THE XUKURU

2009-10-04T23:00:00.001-03:00

Link to Sign Petition: http://www.petitiononline.com/Xucuru/petition.html

Saturday, October 3, 2009 - Fieldwork, What's it Like?

2009-10-03T12:24:00.011-03:00

What is Fieldwork? What does it mean, and how is it done?
As anthropology students know, ethnographic methods courses require them to read an assortment of texts and articles that provide a glimpse into the everyday reality of fieldwork. Students are exposed to everything from postmodern texts on the decolonization of anthropology, the social constructions that define perceived realities, texts that provide a historical glance at pre-post modern perspectives, and the impossibility of "universal reliability" of scientific methods to produce universal truths about something as nebulous, but real as culture.

While such readings help prepare students to think about the concept of doing fieldwork, they don't prepare you for the realization that as a researcher, YOU ARE THE RESEARCH INSTRUMENT. Your ability to question what, why, and how you experience and interpret the observed world IS your microscope. Without the ability to understanding the mutability of observed phenomenon as "a view," conditioned by senses that have been well trained by cultural perspectives, theoretical and methodological tools will do little to bring into focus the processes by which individuals and collectives produce cultures. As students of anthropology, you have all read Clifford Geertz (Interpretations of Culture, Renato Rosaldo (Culture and Truth), Writing Culture (James Clifford and George Marcus), and many others – all of them discuss the issues facing post-modern ethnography and the problematic of doing ethnographic methods. Below are some interesting web sites about doing ethnography:

http://www.anthroglobe.org/docs/mauryan_fieldwork_061212.html
http://www.alanmacfarlane.com/DO/filmshow/film30.htm (video on doing fieldwork)

Ethnographic Methods – A tool? A Skill? A Science?
In truth, ethnographic methods do not reflect precise methods, but rather prepare the anthropologist for the complexities of observing and comprehending the human experience. Not only does ethnography teach us how to be participants in the daily lives of those we study, but to also how to examine ourselves as observers. This is not easy work, and often it requires that the researcher extend beyond their limits of comfort, both physically and emotionally.

For me, ethnography requires patience, with myself and my perceived abilities. It also requires me to be persistent and determined, even when I realize that the experiences of everyday life are extraordinarily complex, and are probably beyond any researchers ability to completely capture. I have learned that if I'm to understand anything while in the field, it will be because I have learned how to questions what I perceive. For example, behaviors that appear odd or uncomfortable to me as an observer are opportunities to shift my perspectives and ask myself why I am experiencing my observations in this way.

The experience of participating in the field also pushes the anthropologist to be involved in practicing what they observe. Noting behaviors (both physical and social) through observation and participation also allows for theorizing a range of possible explanations for individual and collective behaviors, and the methods of grounded theory can assist in developing fresh theoretical perspectives. Essentially, grounded theory requires the researcher to begin with a set of specific questions, which are studied and observed through the use of participant observation and the use of extensive memos and use of coding skills. When data becomes saturated, that is when you begin to receive the same kind of information again and again, it is time to ask a new question, and the research continues in this manner – from the ground up. Eventually, the researchers potentially can develop fresh theoretical perspectives about their subjects.

While American ethnographers in the early 20th century assumed culture to be tied intrinsically to ethnicity and location (for example: all Japanese are…, or all French are…), binding all who lived in its presence to share and express themselves as people from "a culture" - current ethnography understands that while "culture" exists, it is individuals and their agency that create, pass-on, and modify culture, and in doing so, are not simply passive recipients of an organic set of cultural forces, but are active social agents in constructing the cultures in which they live. This means that culture is both local and global, and that there are cultures within cultures. Hence, ethnographers can study any group or organization, such as the culture of a university system, the culture of North Dakota agro-business, or any other area of interest.

Ethnography is the "tool" used by the ethnographer, and the method most commonly used is participant observation, which requires the ethnographer to become immersed in the culture being studied, and to be an active participant in the culture while recording extensive field notes.

Questions: Help me answer these questions
How does the anthropologist become a participant observer? Can she or he just arrive one day in the field, say with indigenous people in Brazil, and begin living and recording daily activities? How do I gain access to the group of people I want to study, and how do I introduce myself to them? What do I tell them about the research I want to do? How do they understand my research? Is it important for the anthropologist to understand how the people they are studying understand his/her work? Why? Are there ethics involved in my work while doing ethnography as an anthropologist? If so, what are these ethics, and how do I make sure I am following them? Are ethics universal and the same across all cultures? If not, what does this mean about the ways in which current anthropology constructs its ethical foundations? (Here is the web page for the American Anthropological Association's Statement on Ethics: http://www.aaanet.org/_cs_upload/issues/policy-advocacy/27668_1.pdf). And, probably the most important of all - how do I decide what and who is important to study?

What I would like for students to do is to try answering some of these questions on your own, before I tell you my understandings and experiences of fieldworking. Don't be afraid to take one of the questions above and write down what you think/feel about the questions. For example, how would you answer the question "how could I gain access (get into, get introduced, get to know) the people I want to study? Or, how would you know what you wanted to study? What are your reasons for wanting to study a particular group and/or situations and why is it important to know what your reasons are?

I'll write more tomorrow on this very important topic. It is an important topic because ethnography is a qualitative research process that is not rooted in seeking universal truths - that is "factual reality." If the ethnographer is not after "facts" what is she/he after?

Joseph and I - On the Plane to Brazil

2009-10-01T14:01:00.002-03:00

This message was sent using the Picture and Video Messaging service from Verizon Wireless!

To learn how you can snap pictures and capture videos with your wireless phone visit www.verizonwireless.com/picture.

Note: To play video messages sent to email, QuickTime® 6.5 or higher is required.

October 3, 2009 - More Abuse Against the Guarani Kaiowa Apyka'y in Mato Grosso do Sul - Cacique Marcos in Brazillia

2009-10-01T12:30:00.007-03:00

Cacique Marcos Xukuru has gone to Brasilia to advocate for indigenous peoples rights in Brazil. He will be returning in the next few days. I will be leaving for Pesqueira on October 11th to stay with the Cacique and participate in the various meetings that he attends with local indigenous leaders in the aldeias (village communities) on Xukuru land.

In the mean time, there are some serious human rights abuses occurring to the Guarani Kaiowa Apyka´y in the state of Mato Grosso do Sul. I've posted information about the recent attacks against the Guarani Kaiowa in my last blog post. Below, I am providing some additional information about international financial involvements in Brazil, and the lack of the Brazilian government’s foresight in planning projects, particularly those that are linked to the extraction of natural resources that have led to environmental destruction and continued human rights abuses against indigenous people.

Finally, I would like readers to think about ways to solve issues of global environmental destruction that are rooted in international financial relations, particularly with the World Bank, the IMF, Free Trade, and Neoliberal Economics. As the need to extract, process, and produce goods for the world’s populations continues to grow, so does the need for new solutions that will ensure the sustainability of the planet’s ecosystems and the continued existence of cultural human diversity.

Finding Solutions? Questions for Readers

Here is an article posted on the web page "Survival International" (http://www.survivalinternational.org/news/4957) that provides an example of how social activism can act as a powerful tool and incentive to change status-quo loan procedures at the World Bank. Social activism only works with large social movements kick into action. The question is, how do we get ourselves and others to take action - to become involved and participate in stopping abusive practices (environmental and human) AND contribute to finding solutions? Do we change the way we educate our children? Do we make sure that university classes are engaged and involved in real life issues and that information learned is applied in practice? What do you think? Below are several web pages discussing the economic, social, and cultural (all three are inter-connected) practices that generate destructive, non-sustainable processes that are leading to the potential collapse of global environments.

Wep Pages - Environmental Destruction & Impact on Indigenous Peoples

http://www.mongabay.com/brazil-state_deforestation.html State Deforestation in the Brazilian Amazon

http://news.mongabay.com/2009/0601-brazil_politics.html Political infighting in Brazil threatens the Amazon rainforest
mongabay.com

June 01, 2009
http://news.mongabay.com/2009/0205-brazil.html Brazil to boost spending on infrastructure to counter economic crisis
mongabay.com

February 05, 2009
http://news.mongabay.com/2008/1113-madeira.html Brazil OKs $4 billion dam in the Amazon rainforest
mongabay.com

November 13, 2008
http://news.mongabay.com/2007/1003-ci_amazon.html South American development plan could destroy the Amazon
mongabay.com

October 2, 2007
http://news.mongabay.com/2007/0608-xingu.html Amazon tribe blocks major Brazilian highway
mongabay.com

June 8, 2007
http://news.mongabay.com/2007/0425-brazil.html Brazil splits environmental agency to fast-track development projects
Rhett A. Butler, mongabay.com

April 25, 2007
http://news.mongabay.com/2006/0317-reuters.html Brazil to flood Amazon rainforest for hydroelectric power
By Reese Ewing Reuters

Indios acusam empresa de segurança por ataque

2009-10-01T11:56:00.002-03:00

Please log onto the web pages below and read about the very recent attack against the Guarani Kaiowá in Brazil. Amnesty International has posted an Urgent Action regarding this case. I've posted it in Portuguese below the web pages:

http://www.juridicobrasil.com.br/portal/index.php?tipo=2&cod=2&id_noticia=487429 Portuguese version of the events of September 18, 2009 - Guarani Kaiowá community of Apyka'y in Brazil

http://zd109948.bravejournal.com/ An English version of the events of September 18, 2009 - Guarani Kaiowá community of Apyka'y in Brazil

See attached file: 25-09-2009_AU 254-09_Brasil_pt.doc)

AU: 254/09 Índice: AMR 19/017/09 Brasil Data: 25 de setembro de 2009

AÇÃO URGENTE
GRUPO INDÍGENA ATACADO POR HOMENS ARMADOS
Cerca de dez homens armados atacaram a comunidade Guarani Kaiowa Apyka´y, próxima de Dourados, estado do Mato Grosso do Sul. Tiros foram disparados de forma indiscriminada contra o acampamento da comunidade, uma cabana foi incendiada e membros da comunidade foram física e verbalmente ameaçados. O grupo indígena, que está acampado ao lado da rodovia desde que foram expulsos de suas terras ancestrais em abril de 2009, teme que mais atos violentos ocorram.

A comunidade de 15 famílias Apyka´y foi atacada à uma hora da madrugada de 18 de setembro. Um índio de 62 anos de idade foi atingido na perna; uma mulher ficou ferida nas costas após ser agredida e um cachorro foi morto a tiros. Os homens atearam fogo a um dos barracos, queimando-o totalmente e destruindo os pertences da família. Durante o ataque, um dos homens armados disse aos membros da comunidade que se eles não abandonassem o acampamento, haveria mortes e que não era a polícia federal, mas a “polícia da companhia” que controlava a área.

Os promotores federais que abriram um inquérito sobre o incidente estão investigando a possibilidade de o ataque ter sido realizado pelos guardas de segurança que trabalham para a companhia Gaspem Segurança – uma empresa de segurança frequentemente utilizada pelos fazendeiros da região para a guarda das propriedades. Seguranças empregados pela empresa foram denunciados pela morte do líder indígena Dorvalino Rocha em dezembro de 2005, e foram acusados pelos promotores federais do assassinato de Xurete Lopes em janeiro de 2007.

A comunidade Guarani Kaiowa Apyka´y tentou várias vezes reocupar suas terras ancestrais desde que foram expulsos pelos fazendeiros na década de 1990. Sua mais recente tentativa ocorreu em junho de 2008, mas eles foram obrigados a voltar para a beira da estrada, que passa por suas terras ancestrais, em abril de 2009, após os proprietários conseguirem uma ordem de expulsão. Suas terras, que agora são utilizadas para o cultivo de cana-de-açúcar, foram selecionadas para identificação (o primeiro passo na demarcação de terras indígenas) em um processo iniciado pelas autoridades federais em 2007, mas repetidamente bloqueado pelo governo estadual e pelo lobby rural local. A comunidade permanece acampada às margens da rodovia no lado oposto ao de um posto de segurança da Gaspem, que tem alegado que se estabeleceu no local para proteger as plantações de cana-de-açúcar e para desencorajar novas ocupações.

POR FAVOR, ESCREVA IMEDIATAMENTE, em português ou em seu próprio idioma:
Pedindo às autoridades que garantam a segurança da comunidade e seu acesso a comida, água e proteção adequadas enquanto permanecerem acampados na rodovia;
Solicitando que as autoridades iniciem uma ampla investigação acerca das operações da Gaspem Segurança – uma empresa com um longo histórico relacionado à violação de direitos humanos contra os povos indígenas;
Instando as autoridades a cumprirem plenamente suas obrigações relativas à Convenção 169 da Organização Internacional do Trabalho, à Declaração das Nações Unidas sobre os Direitos dos Povos Indígenas e à Constituição Brasileira, finalizando a demarcação das terras.

POR FAVOR, ENVIE OS APELOS ANTES DE 6 DE NOVEMBRO PARA:
Ministro da Justiça
Exmo. Sr. Tarso Genro
Esplanada dos Ministérios,
Bloco "T"
70712-902 - Brasília/DF Brasil
Fax: + 55 61 3322 6817
+ 55 61 3224 3398
Tratamento: Exmo. Sr. Ministro

Secretário Nacional de Direitos Humanos
Secretaria Especial de Direitos Humanos
Exmo. Secretário Especial
Sr. Paulo de Tarso Vannuchi
Esplanada dos Ministérios - Bloco "T" - 4º andar, 70064-900 - Brasília/DF Brasil
Fax: + 55 61 3226 7980
Tratamento: Exmo. Sr. Secretário

E CÓPIAS PARA:
Conselho Indigenista Missionário - CIMI (ONG local)
CIMI Regional Mato Grosso do Sul
Av. Afonso Pena,
1557 Sala 208 Bl. B
79002-070 Campo Grande/MS Brasil

Envie cópias também para as representações diplomáticas acreditadas em seu país. Por favor, verifique com a sessão da AI em seu país se for enviá-los após 6 de novembro de 2009
AÇÃO URGENTE GRUPO INDÍGENA ATACADO POR HOMENS ARMADOS

INFORMAÇÃO ADICIONAL

O estado do Mato Grosso do Sul abriga algumas das menores, mais pobres e mais densas áreas de população indígena do Brasil: bolsões de pobreza cercados por grandes plantações de soja e cana-de-açúcar e fazendas de criação de animais, onde a vida é extremamente difícil devido às péssimas condições de saúde e às pobres condições de vida. Cerca de 60.000 índios Guarani Kaiowa vivem em condições precárias – a ruptura social tem conduzido a elevadas taxas de violência, suicídio e má nutrição. Frustrados com a lentidão no processo de demarcação de terras, os Guarani Kaiowa começaram a reocupar suas terras ancestrais, mas têm sido submetidos a intimidações e expulsões violentas.

Em novembro de 2007, o Ministro da Justiça, a Promotoria Federal, a FUNAI e 23 líderes indígenas assinaram um acordo (Termo de Ajustamento de Conduta, TAC), que compromete a FUNAI a identificar 36 diferentes áreas de terras ancestrais dos índios Guarani Kaiowa – incluindo as terras da comunidade Apyka´y – até 2010, para futura demarcação. O acordo foi veemente criticado pelo governo estadual e pelo lobby dos fazendeiros. Após a assinatura do TAC, o governador do estado, André Puccinello, ameaçou não honrar o acordo e o vice-governador, Jerson Domingos, jogou mais lenha na fogueira ao mencionar a inevitabilidade de um “banho de sangue” a que este processo conduziria, com o acirramento do conflito entre a polícia, os índios e os proprietários de terra. Os fazendeiros locais vêm se opondo ao processo, exagerando, para a imprensa, a quantidade de terras que poderiam ser identificadas como indígenas e constantemente tentam bloquear o processo judicialmente. Atualmente existem mais de 80 recursos tramitando no Tribunal Regional Federal envolvendo terras indígenas no Mato Grosso do Sul.

Por conta do fracasso em dar uma solução às reivindicações de terra, muitas comunidades de Guarani Kaiowa têm partido para a reocupação das terras. Com isso, tem ocorrido uma série de expulsões, deixando os grupos vivendo à beira de rodovias, em frente às áreas que reivindicam. Vivendo em precárias condições, sem acesso a suas colheitas ou a água potável, eles estão expostos a ameaças dos guardas de segurança contratados para evitar a reocupação das terras. Empresas de segurança irregulares, muitas das quais agindo efetivamente como milícias ilegais a serviço dos proprietários de terra ou da agroindústria, têm se envolvido em diversos abusos de direitos humanos nas áreas rurais do Brasil e permanecem como uma séria ameaça não só aos povos indígenas, mas também aos trabalhadores rurais que lutam pelo direito à terra.

Tanto a Declaração das Nações Unidas sobre os Direitos dos Povos Indígenas, ratificada pelo Brasil em 2007, quanto a Convenção 169 da Organização Mundial do Trabalho, da qual o Brasil é signatário, garantem aos povos indígenas direitos sobre suas terras ancestrais e exigem que os Estados estabeleçam mecanismos para garantir que estes direitos sejam adjudicados e reconhecidos. A Constituição Brasileira também garante aos povos indígenas brasileiros o direito a suas terras e a responsabilidade da União em demarcá-las.

AU: 254/09 Índice: AMR 19/017/09 Data de Emissão: 25 de setembro de 2009

IMG00010-20090923-0940.jpg

2009-09-29T08:43:00.001-03:00

View Out My Window

This message was sent using the Picture and Video Messaging service from Verizon Wireless!

To learn how you can snap pictures and capture videos with your wireless phone visit www.verizonwireless.com/picture.

Note: To play video messages sent to email, QuickTime� 6.5 or higher is required.

Maracatu

2009-09-28T12:42:00.004-03:00

Note: To play video messages sent to email, QuickTime® 6.5 or higher is required.

2009-09-27T14:30:00.000-03:00

Interior Hallway in Olinda Posada

Large Doll in Olinda Posada

Front Desk in Olinda Posada

2009-09-26T12:11:00.000-03:00

September 26, 2009 - Continuation of Attempted Assassination

When Marcos arrived as the home of the Indian helping him, he took off his clothes to look for any other injuries. While he had cuts from barbed wire, He had not been shot. His ear was torn and bleeding a lot, and he had other deep cuts on his face from falling and from barbed wire fences. He was taken to the local hospital in Pesqueira where his deeper cuts were stitched and bandaged. He was given sedation and taken to his mother’s house on Indian land. According to Marcos, he slept for at least eight to ten hours.

During the time Marcos slept, the indigenous community reacted out of anger and fear. They had lost five individuals (leaders, a lawyer, and Xicao Xukuru in 1998), and from their perspective they could not restrain their emotions. While Xicao (Marcos' father) and Marcos were both caciques (chiefs), they spoke of non-violent social activism and encouraged peaceful practices during their ratonada (regaining their land by occupying it (camping on the land) and refusing to leave. The assassination of Xicao occurred during this time. Such land occupations are dangerous for indigenous peoples, who often have waited for several years (actually since the 1988 constitution) to have their lands returned.

While Marcos was at his mother's house sleeping, the indigenous community revolted by setting fire to the house of an indigenous leader who had historically sided with non-indigenous landed elites (apparently he was paid for his collaborations), and according to indigenous leaders participated in the attempted assassination of Marcos. In addition, they burned his car/s and other personal property, ending by running him (his name is Bio) off indigenous land. He currently lives in the city of Pesqueira, and maintains relations with political leaders and local businessmen, who want to build a religious tourism site on a sacred land where Xicao Xukuru (the previous leader who was assassinated)was interned (the Xukuru say they "plant" their dead). A majority of the leaders, according to Cacique Marcus Xukuru, do not want such a site to be built, which would consist of a multi-storied hotel and "cultural center" that would demonstrate indigenous religious practices.

The Federal Police (FP) arrived on the scene of the murders (of the two young Xukuru men accompanying Marcos), and the scene of the revolt that resulted in the burning of Bio's house and property. The FP focused attenion on the riot, and deemed the two murders of the Xukuru youth to be an internal dispute, and not an attempted assassination of Cacique Marcus Xukuru. Due to the FP investigation, Cacique Marcos Xukuru was found guilty of inciting the riot, and existing evidence of his alibi (staying with his mother in a sedated state and with evidence of the medical care he received at the hospital)was ignored. A pre-trial hearing determined he was guilty and a suggested sentence of 10 years and 4 months was determined.

He is currently not imprisoned, but is awaiting a repeal of the suggested sentence, and a trial by jury in the near future. Law student, Joseph Mandala will be adding his legal opinions, ideas, thoughts, and suggestions. I would appreciate questions from readers, especially my students in the Department of Anthropology at the University of North Dakota. This blog is intended to assist in the dissemination of information regarding the Xukuru and other indigenous peoples and explore ways in which international human rights documents can be applied to assist them in their struggles for basic dignity and respect. Students ideas, questions, opinions (as long as they are respectful) are welcomed, and such input will assist me in thinking about how to work with social action research here in Pernambuco.

2009-09-23T11:46:00.000-03:00

I hoped to be posting by September 16th, but that was too ambitious. Here’s a summary of events that have occurred since we arrived on September 17th. Law student, Joseph Mandala and I flew into Recife on the morning of September 17th and were taken to our hotel. We were able to rest for about an hour before we went to scheduled meetings with CIMI, an NGO (non-governmental organization) working with indigenous peoples human rights. A meeting was arranged with Sandro, one of the lawyers working on the case of Cacique Marcos Xukuru (Chief Marcos Xukuru). Joseph and I were able to spend approximately three hours with Sandro, talking and video-taping important parts of our conversation about the history of the case against Marcos. I will leave a more detailed report to Joseph, who will post his summary on this blog in a few days.
Briefly, Cacique Marcos has been charged with initiating a riot on Xukuru Indian land after the attempted assassination on his life. In essence, the victim became the perpetrator. Here’s how I understand the story to date: In February of 2003, the Cacique was returning from a meeting with the council of leaders on Xukuru land. He was driving a truck, with an open back for carrying heavy loads of construction material. At a point in the road, he was forced to stop his car because a herd of cows were crossing the road. In the car with the Cacique were two young men around the ages of 20-22 years of age, and his cousin, who was 11 ½ at the time. Sitting on the side of the road were two men, doing nothing, just sitting. The Cacique got out of the car and asked what was happening, and the men didn’t respond. Then, a man appeared in the road from the bush (the land is hilly and filled with densely packed bushes, trees, and a variety of local plants. This male came toward the Cacique, who asked what was going on, since the cows were not being encouraged to cross the road. The man didn’t answer. The Cacique asked again, and the man didn’t answer for a second time. When the Cacique asked again, the man pulled a gun from his pocket and said “prepare to die” , and then shot at the Cacique, who saw the gun coming out of his pocket. The Cacique reacted quickly, and fell to the ground and rolled toward his truck, where he managed to get underneath it. The two young men in the car reacted by getting out of the car. One of them grabbed the man with the gun, and the other approached the men sitting by the road for help. One of the men had a wooden club, and the young man was hit in the head with it, and fell to the ground unconscious. The Cacique managed to crawl from under the truck and throw himself into the barbed wire and crawl through it. He sustained injuries to his face, and cuts to his ear¸ and was bleeding heavily. He got to his feet and ran through the bush, crashing into thorns and falling into holes in the ground. A man (Indian) saw Cacique Marcos running and that he was injured, and proceeded to help him by taking him to his house, where he was examined to see if he had been shot.
More later – the taxi is here to take us to a meeting at CIMI

social networking list

2009-09-07T17:16:00.000-03:00

Please follow me on my blog, youtube, and twitter accounts while I'm in Brazil. See my signature line for account information.

Marcia Mikulak

Associate Professor

Anthropology Department

University of North Dakota

Grand Forks, ND 58202-8374

701-777-0718 Office

701-330-1311 Cell

http://www.und.edu/dept/anthro/Dr_Mikulak.html

www.twitter.com/xukurutwit

www.facebook.com/marcia.mikulak

www.youtube.com/marciamikulak

Start-up Blog Date

2009-08-18T17:41:00.000-03:00

This blog will start on September 16th, 2009, on the plane to Recife, Pernambuco, Brazil. On September 22, 2009 there is going to be a large public demonstration in support of the Xukuru chief, Cacique (chief) Marcus Xukuru in Recife, Pernambuco, Brazil. The demonstration is to protest the 10 year and 4 month sentence given to Cacique Marcus Xukuru, the subsequent conviction of 30 other indigenous leaders and activists by the 16th Federal Court jurisdiction in Caruaru (PE) in 2009.

I will be video recording the protest and will post it on YouTube, my webpage (http://www.und.edu/dept/anthro/Dr_Mikulak.html).

I'm looking forward to thinking out-loud, and learning from readers.

Marcia Mikulak
Associate Professor
Department of Anthropology
University of North Dakota
Grand Forks, ND 58201