The ruling highlights abuses by the Union, including the Armed Forces. This is the first time the Brazilian state has been internationally condemned for violations against quilombolas.
With information from Global Justice
In a landmark ruling, the Inter-American Court of Human Rights (CorIDH) condemned Brazil for violating the fundamental rights of quilombolas during the installation and operation of the Alcântara military rocket launch base in Maranhão. This is the first time that the Brazilian state, including the Armed Forces, has been internationally condemned for measures and policies against these populations.
The violations involve the rights to: collective land title; free use and movement within the area; housing; food; education; cultural participation; family protection; and "free, prior, and informed" consultation. CorIDH found that all of these actions compromised the "collective life project" of 171 communities.
As reparation and compensation, the Court ordered the government to title the 78,1 hectares of traditional territory within three years and pay US$4 million to the residents' associations. The federal administration must also conduct "free, prior, and informed" consultation on measures affecting them, hold a public act acknowledging its responsibility, and establish a "permanent dialogue table" with the quilombolas.
Decision summary (in Portuguese)
Decision in full (in Spanish)
The military installation was built in the early 1980s. In total, 312 families from 32 communities were evicted from their homes. Over the course of four decades, the government has presented several plans and taken steps to expand the aerospace center, to the detriment of the quilombolas. The Jair Bolsonaro administration even signed a treaty with the United States in 2019 for the commercial use of the base.
Located in the São Luís metropolitan area, Alcântara has over 18,000 inhabitants and the largest quilombola population in the country proportionally: almost 85% of the total, according to the 2002 IBGE Census. In total, there are 3,300 families spread across more than 170 communities, living primarily from small-scale agriculture and artisanal fishing. Occupation dates back to the 18th century.
Historic ruling and agreement
"Overall, the ruling is very good. It's a historic decision," says Danilo Serejo, a political scientist and advisor to the Movement of People Affected by the Alcântara Space Base (MABE), one of the organizations responsible for filing the lawsuit with CorIDH in 2001. "Now we're entering the phase of getting the state to fulfill its duty of implementing this ruling," he adds. He emphasizes that the decision prohibits the expansion of the aerospace center.
"It's not a recommendation, it's not a statement, it's not a suggestion. It's a determination that comes from the inter-American system for the Brazilian State to comply with," reinforces Melisanda Trentin, coordinator of the Socio-Environmental Justice program at Justiça Global, another of the organizations responsible for the action (read more in the box at the end of the report).
“Brazil respects the Inter-American human rights system and will take the necessary measures to comply with what was established in the decision,” said the Attorney General of the Union, Jorge Messias, in note from the Attorney General's Office (AGU)The government has reportedly been able to demonstrate that the “implementation of many of the Court’s rulings is already underway,” he said.
"The AGU will now analyze the various aspects of the ruling regarding the possible admissibility of a request for clarification from the Inter-American Court of Human Rights within the available 90-day period. It will also prepare an Enforcement Opinion (PFE) to communicate the content of the decision to the competent bodies and indicate the need for its compliance, in accordance with the Brazilian State's international obligations," the text continues.
In September, the government closed a agreement with the quilombolas which established the formal conditions for the initiation of land titling and canceled the aerospace center's expansion plan. The creation of the Interministerial Working Group (GTI) that facilitated the agreement took place in April 2023, on the eve of the hearing of the now-concluded trial. According to civil society organizations following the case, the federal administration accelerated and concluded the negotiations under pressure from the lawsuit.
At the 2023 hearing in Santiago, Chile, the Brazilian government had already acknowledged some of its responsibility and apologized. Shortly afterward, the organizations responsible for the lawsuit claimed that the statement was incomplete and that the federal government had failed to propose effective measures for the immediate titling and reparations of the quilombolas.
In July 2024, in another historic decision, the International Labor Organization (ILO) had already recommended that Brazil title the lands and respect the communities' right to consultation. It was also the first time in history that the organization had ruled on a case involving traditional Afro-descendant populations worldwide.
How do CorIDH decisions work?
Countries that sign the American Convention on Human Rights (ACHR) are obliged to comply with the decisions of the Inter-American Convention on Human Rights (IACHR), but there is no legal provision for specific sanctions with greater consequences if they fail to do so, such as fines imposed by the national judiciary, for example. Failure to comply with these determinations, however, would entail significant diplomatic damage.
“The absence of international legal mechanisms that oblige signatory States to the American Convention on Human Rights to comply with the decisions of the CorIDH does not mean that they are not obliged to comply with them,” says the popular lawyer of Socioenvironmental Institute (ISA) Fernando Priore.
“The signing of international conventions and treaties on human rights presupposes the good faith and interest of States in complying with them, including the need to comply with decisions of the IACHR,” he continues.
Prioste adds that these decisions also serve as an important reference for similar cases in the Brazilian judiciary. Furthermore, they can be used as tools for structural transformations that enforce quilombola rights, for example, by changing, correcting, or proposing public policies.
Loading