MPF uses to which the Supreme hamstring again works of Belo Monte


Feature was for President Carlos Ayres Britto. If it does not reconsider its decision, the case shall be examined by the plenary

The Federal prosecutors entered today with feature in the Supreme Court to be halted the construction of the Belo Monte hydroelectric plant until they are held consultations with indigenous people affected by the plant. The works were authorised to continue last week by an injunction of the President of the SUPREME COURT, Carlos Ayres Britto, who suspended an earlier decision of the Federal Court of the 1st region, favorable to the query. The MPF requests that the resource itself Ayres Britto reconsider its decision. If he does not agree, the case will be examined by the plenary of the Supreme.
The MPF is a further feature of regimental and entered today (04/09), with Roberto Gurgel, Attorney General of the Republic, and Deputy Attorney General Deborah Duprat. They maintain that, according to the Brazilian Constitution and the Convention 169 of the International Labour Organization, the Indians must be consulted by the National Congress before any decision that may affect their survival, as is the case of the Belo Monte plant works.
Claim that the complaint, feature used by the Attorney General of the Union to suspend the decision of TRF1, is not the correct way to resolve the case, because if it sustains in a provisional decision of the then President of STF, Minister Ellen Gracie. For the MPF, “would only be possible the management of claim to preserve the constitutionality of Legislative Decree 788 (which authorized Belo Monte), if this was a decision of the plenum of the SUPREME COURT, and not a monocrática decision of the then President of the Court”.
“Never a decision on suspension of injunction may condition the trial on the merits of the main action. So that is legally impossible, by way of complaint, the annulment of the judgment in motion for a declaration in civil appeal “means the MPF, for whom the decision of TRF1 overlaps previous decisions and forces the stoppage injunctions of the works.
Gurgel and Duprat also claim that the Brazilian Constitution, in 1988, inaugurated new premises of citizenship for indigenous peoples, flouted by the National Congress in the decree which authorized Belo Monte. “The goal of the constituent Assembly was to empower indigenous communities, conceiving them as subject and not as an object of State action, and allowing them to fight for their own rights in all spheres,” they say.
“It cannot be considered as democracy and the parliamentary legislative process due a decision that can affect directly and deeply an indigenous community without ensuring that ethnic group at least the right voice, at least the possibility of trying to influence the persuasion of parliamentarians, whose decision will affect your destiny”, says the MPF resource, to complete: “the query later, when already consummated the fact on which you want to discuss, is mere form without substance, incompatible with expressive freedoms and the management of own destiny that both the Constitution and ILO Convention 169/provide them.”


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: