Quantcast

Brazil Moves to Open Indigenous Lands to Mining

Truck being loaded with bauxite ore at Brazil's Norsk Hydro ASA Paragominas mine. Norsk Hydro ASA via Visual Hunt / CC BY-NC-SA

By Sue Branford and Maurício Torres

For many years, international and Brazilian mining companies have dreamed of getting access to the mineral wealth lying beneath indigenous lands. And finally, the government of Jair Bolsonaro seems determined to give them that opportunity. On March 4, while Brazilians were distracted by Carnival celebrations, the new Minister of Mines and Energy Admiral Bento Albuquerque announced plans to permit mining on indigenous land.



Speaking at the annual convention of the Prospectors & Developers Association of Canada (PDAC), a major event in the mining world that attracts tens-of-thousands of attendees, the Minister said that Brazil's indigenous people would be given a voice but not a veto in the matter. The opening of indigenous ancestral territories to mining, he predicted, would "bring benefits to these communities and to the country."

He also said that he intends to allow mining right up to Brazil's borders, abolishing the current 150-kilometer (93-mile) wide mining buffer zone at the frontier.

The minister said that current mining restrictions are outdated. The long-restricted indigenous and border areas "have become centers of conflict and illegal activities, that in no way contribute to sustainable development or to sovereignty and national security." The administration will shortly be holding a nationwide consultation to discuss how the changes should be made, he concluded.

He also said that he intends to allow mining right up to Brazil's borders, abolishing the current 150-kilometer (93-mile) wide mining buffer zone at the frontier.

The minister said that current mining restrictions are outdated. The long-restricted indigenous and border areas "have become centers of conflict and illegal activities, that in no way contribute to sustainable development or to sovereignty and national security." The administration will shortly be holding a nationwide consultation to discuss how the changes should be made, he concluded.

An industrial mining operation in Brazil. Note the forest at the edge of the open pit mine.

Norsk Hydro ASA via VisualHunt.com / CC BY-NC-SA

Bolsonaro's Indigenous Land Development Agenda

The minister's announcement was not unexpected. President Jair Bolsonaro, an ex-army captain, has said that he admires the 1964-85 military dictatorship, and some are drawing parallels between Bolsonaro's policies and theirs regarding indigenous and quilombola communities.

Bolsonaro recently wrote on Twitter: "Over 15 percent of national territory is demarcated as indigenous and quilombola land. Less than a million people live in these isolated areas, exploited and manipulated by NGOs. We are going to integrate these citizens."

Back in 1976, Maurício Rangel Reis, interior minister in the military government of General Ernesto Geisel, expressed harsh views toward indigenous peoples: "We plan to reduce the number of Indians from 220,000 to 20,000 in ten years," he declared. But the military didn't achieve this goal. Far from being eliminated, Brazil's indigenous numbers increased to their current 900,000 population.

Indigenous groups achieved real gains after the military government passed into history, and its dictatorial rule was supplanted by the progressive 1988 Brazilian constitution, which brought two important innovations. It abandoned the goal of assimilating indigenous people into the dominant culture (a goal Bolsonaro wants to reinstate), and it affirmed the concept of "original rights," recognizing indigenous peoples as Brazil's first inhabitants, with the right to remain on ancestral lands.

Article 231 of the Constitution states: "Indians have the right to the permanent occupation of their traditional land and to enjoy the exclusive use of the wealth in the soil, rivers and lakes." Moreover, their land rights are "inalienable." The Constitution allows for mining on indigenous land, but only after the Indians have been consulted and specific procedures for doing so, approved by them, have been ratified by Congress.

Mining industry and individual prospecting requests on indigenous land as filed with the federal government.

Mauricio Torres using data provided by the Departamento Nacional de Produção Mineral

Admiral Albuquerque's recent announcement provided no clue as to how the Bolsonaro government could legally give indigenous groups a voice but no veto regarding use of their lands, while somehow staying within the letter of constitutional law.

The Ministry of Mines and Energy has, however, confirmed to Mongabay that it plans to authorize mining on indigenous areas. Though, as to the legal mechanisms for doing so, it would only say that "the specific regulatory model will be discussed with Congress and other involved parties." Though its reports are unconfirmed, analysts suggest Bolsonaro will probably issue a presidential decree to allow mining, which is the approach he plans to use to permit agribusiness to lease land within indigenous reserves ­— a move that faces a similar constitutional roadblock.

If it goes forward with these presidential decrees, the administration will very likely face opposition from powerful figures in the judiciary, including the country's top prosecutor. Speaking at a conference attended by representatives of some of Brazil's 305 indigenous tribes, advocacy groups and a dozen European nations, Prosecutor General Raquel Dodge noted that indigenous land rights are guaranteed in Brazil's Constitution and warned: "There can be no backsliding on public policies toward the indigenous people."

The Amazonas branch of the Federal Public Ministry (MPF), an independent group of federal and state litigators, is so concerned at Bolsonaro's mining plan that in February it went to court to ask the National Mining Agency (Agência Nacional de Mineração, ANM), the federal body that administers the mining sector, to turn down all requests by international and Brazilian mining companies to prospect or mine on indigenous land.

The mining industry has not only made prospecting requests (red) within indigenous reserves (yellow), but also on other conserved lands (green).

Mauricio Torres using data provided by the Departamento Nacional de Produção Mineral

According to the MPF, mining companies and individuals have altogether lodged 4,073 requests with the ANM for mining-related activities on indigenous land since 1969, seemingly in preparation for an eventual land rush. The companies say that they are only registering their interest, but MPF argues that, until the required constitutional amendments have been written and approved by Congress, such requests should not even be permitted.

Brazil's indigenous peoples have clearly indicated that if the mining plan goes forward they will fight back. Most don't want mining on their land. Munduruku female warrior Maria Leuza Munduruku told Mongabay: "We've had a lot of outsiders coming onto our land to mine. Many fish disappear and the ones that remain we can't eat, as they're dirty."

Joenia Wapichana, Brazil's only indigenous female federal deputy, said that Indians don't want the money mining might bring in: "For us indigenous people wealth is having health, land to live on without receiving threats, a stable climate, demarcated land, a preserved culture and respect for our community." Brazil's mining environmental and safety record is marred by frequent waterway contamination and land pollution, and includes two deadly tailings dam collapses in the past three years,

Davi Kopenawa Yanomami, one of Brazil's best-known indigenous leaders, says that large-scale mining by big companies is particularly harmful: "This kind of mining requires roads to transport the mineral, large areas to store production, big dormitories where workers can sleep," he said. "It will transform our forest." A 2017 study found that mining and its auxiliary activities caused 10 percent of deforestation in the Brazilian Amazon between 2005 and 2015. How much Amazon deforestation might skyrocket if indigenous reserves are opened to mining now is anyone's guess; indigenous groups are currently the Amazon's best land stewards.

Federal Deputy Leonardo Quintao, a major backer of the mining industry.

Vinicius Loures / Agência Brasil

Mining Companies in the Driver's Seat

After last year's election, the pro-mining lobby in Congress, known by some as the "mud lobby," is stronger than ever.

Their main spokesperson, federal deputy Leonardo Quintão, is a member of Bolsonaro's Civil Office. He openly admits to receiving money from mining companies: "I am a parliamentarian legally financed by mining companies," he said. Quintão was the first rapporteur for Brazil's new Mining Code, presented to the National Congress in 2013, which mining companies helped him formulate. He is proud of his work: "Our Code is modern … outlawing all kind of speculation in the mining sector."

But others complain of Congress's failure to talk to potentially impacted communities when planning the new code. According to anthropologist Maria Júlia Zanon, who coordinates the Movement for Popular Sovereignty in Mining (Movimento pela Soberania Popular na Mineração), "The companies' economic interests, evident in the elections, help explain the lack of democracy in the [congressional approval] process."

As of now, the new Mining Code has yet to be signed into law, and the horrific Vale mining disaster in Brumadinho this January, with 193 people dead and another 115 missing, might further delay approval. Andréa Zhouri, at the University of Minas Gerais, said the disaster stemmed from "politico-institutional failures," particularly a lack in regular monitoring of hazardous mining operations. "The [value of] ore is above everything and everyone," Zhouri said.

There has been little indication so far that the government intends to significantly toughen environmental controls in the new Code. Some fear that, once the Brumadinho hue and cry dies down, it will be business as usual and the Mining Code will be approved. Prosecutor Guilherme de Sá Meneghin, who led the investigation into the earlier Mariana mining disaster, said: "What we clearly see is that Brazil doesn't learn the lessons of history."

Today, mining companies chomp at the bit, having registered many prospecting requests within indigenous reserves. Minister Albuquerque — an admiral with a long, illustrious military career, and known for getting what he wants — has signaled readiness to help those firms translate their plans into action. However, Brazil's indigenous people, with a history of batting away threats, often against bad odds, are ready to fiercely resist. The lines are drawn for battle, likely in the courts, and potentially all across Brazil.

Forest and topsoil must first be removed before ore can be accessed at Brazil's Norsk Hydro ASA Paragominas open pit mine. Such industrial processes would be highly destructive of Brazil's forests, indigenous reserves and cultures.

Norsk Hydro ASA via VisualHunt / CC BY-NC-SA

Reposted with permission from our media associate Mongabay.

Show Comments ()

EcoWatch Daily Newsletter

Mizina / iStock / Getty Images

By Ryan Raman, MS, RD

Oats are widely regarded as one of the healthiest grains you can eat, as they're packed with many important vitamins, minerals, and fiber.

Read More Show Less
JPMorgan Chase building in New York City. Ben Sutherland / CC BY 2.0

By Sharon Kelly

A report published Wednesday names the banks that have played the biggest recent role in funding fossil fuel projects, finding that since 2016, immediately following the Paris agreement's adoption, 33 global banks have poured $1.9 trillion into financing climate-changing projects worldwide.

Read More Show Less
Sponsored
Sriram Madhusoodanan of Corporate Accountability speaking on conflict of interest demand of the People's Demands at a defining action launching the Demands at COP24. Corporate Accountability

By Patti Lynn

2018 was a groundbreaking year in the public conversation about climate change. Last February, The New York Times reported that a record percentage of Americans now believe that climate change is caused by humans, and there was a 20 percentage point rise in "the number of Americans who say they worry 'a great deal' about climate change."

Read More Show Less
The head of England's Environment Agency has urged people to stop watering their lawns as a climate-induced water shortage looms. Pexels

England faces an "existential threat" if it does not change how it manages its water, the head of the country's Environment Agency warned Tuesday.

Read More Show Less
Pexels

By Jessica Corbett

A new analysis revealed Tuesday that over the past two decades heat records across the U.S. have been broken twice as often as cold ones—underscoring experts' warnings about the increasingly dangerous consequences of failing to dramatically curb planet-warming emissions.

Read More Show Less
Sponsored
A flock of parrots in Telegraph Hill, San Francisco. ~dgies / Flickr

By Madison Dapcevich

Ask any resident of San Francisco about the waterfront parrots, and they will surely tell you a story of red-faced conures squawking or dive-bombing between building peaks. Ask a team of researchers from the University of Georgia, however, and they will tell you of a mysterious string of neurological poisonings impacting the naturalized flock for decades.

Read More Show Less
Fire burns in the North Santiam State Recreational Area on March 19. Oregon Department of Forestry

An early-season wildfire near Lyons, Oregon burned 60 acres and forced dozens of homes to evacuate Tuesday evening, the Oregon Department of Forestry (ODF) said, as KTVZ reported.

The initial cause of the fire was not yet known, but it has been driven by the strong wind and jumped the North Santiam River, The Salem Statesman Journal reported. As of Tuesday night, it threatened around 35 homes and 30 buildings, and was 20 percent contained.

Read More Show Less
Edwin Hardeman is the plaintiff in the first U.S. federal trial claiming that Roundup causes cancer. NOAH BERGER / AFP / Getty Images

A second U.S. jury has ruled that Roundup causes cancer.

The unanimous verdict was announced Tuesday in San Francisco in the first federal case to be brought against Monsanto, now owned by Bayer, alleging that repeated use of the company's glyphosate-containing weedkiller caused the plaintiff's cancer. Seventy-year-old Edwin Hardeman of Santa Rosa, California said he used Roundup for almost 30 years on his properties before developing non-Hodgkin's lymphoma.

The decision comes less than a year after a jury awarded $289 million to Bay-area groundskeeper Dewayne Johnson over similar claims. The amount was later reduced to $78 million.

"Today's verdict reinforces what another jury found last year, and what scientists with the state of California and the World Health Organization have concluded: Glyphosate causes cancer in people," Environmental Working Group President Ken Cook said in a statement. "As similar lawsuits mount, the evidence will grow that Roundup is not safe, and that the company has tried to cover it up."

Judge Vince Chhabria has split Hardeman's trial into two phases. The first, decided Tuesday, focused exclusively on whether or not Roundup use caused the plaintiff's cancer. The second, to begin Wednesday, will assess if Bayer is liable for damages.

"We are disappointed with the jury's initial decision, but we continue to believe firmly that the science confirms glyphosate-based herbicides do not cause cancer," Bayer spokesman Dan Childs said in a statement reported by The Guardian. "We are confident the evidence in phase two will show that Monsanto's conduct has been appropriate and the company should not be liable for Mr. Hardeman's cancer."

Some legal experts said that Chhabria's decision to split the trial was beneficial to Bayer, Reuters reported. The company had complained that the jury in Johnson's case had been distracted by the lawyers' claims that Monsanto had sought to mislead scientists and the public about Roundup's safety.

However, a remark made by Chhabria during the trial and reported by The Guardian was blatantly critical of the company.

"Although the evidence that Roundup causes cancer is quite equivocal, there is strong evidence from which a jury could conclude that Monsanto does not particularly care whether its product is in fact giving people cancer, focusing instead on manipulating public opinion and undermining anyone who raises genuine and legitimate concerns about the issue," he said.

Many regulatory bodies, including the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, have ruled that glyphosate is safe for humans, but the World Health Organization's International Agency for Research on Cancer found it was "probably carcinogenic to humans" in 2015. A university study earlier this year found that glyphosate use increased cancer risk by as much as 41 percent.

Hardeman's lawyers Jennifer Moore and Aimee Wagstaff said they would now reveal Monsanto's efforts to mislead the public about the safety of its product.

"Now we can focus on the evidence that Monsanto has not taken a responsible, objective approach to the safety of Roundup," they wrote in a statement reported by The Guardian.

Hardeman's case is considered a "bellwether" trial for the more than 760 glyphosate cases Chhabria is hearing. In total, there are around 11,200 such lawsuits pending in the U.S., according to Reuters.

University of Richmond law professor Carl Tobias told Reuters that Tuesday's decision showed that the verdict in Johnson's case was not "an aberration," and could possibly predict how future juries in the thousands of pending cases would respond.