Consema postpones vote on requiring environmental impact assessment of projects near Aboriginal lands

Consema postpones vote on requiring environmental impact assessment of projects near Aboriginal lands

9/21/2012

Recommendation in this regard was submitted to the Council by the MPF/MT

 

In a unanimous vote, the Board members that make up the State Council for the environment (Consema) decided to withdraw from the voting agenda the proposal to amend the Resolution 26, July 2007. The proposal significantly altered the requirements for mandatory submission of environmental impact assessment of projects and activities to be installed near indigenous lands.
Resolution No. 26/07 of Consema, which remains in force, establishes the obligation of preparing the environmental impact assessment (EIA) for projects located 10 kilometers away from indigenous lands. The amendment provided for the EIA requirement only for high-potential polluter enterprises when they are located three miles away from indigenous lands.
In the opinion of prosecutors Marcia Barrientos Zollinger and Rodrigo Timothy, who signed a recommendation submitted to the President of Consema, is worrisome to fixing a distance, still more than three kilometers, the shortsighted to say that this is the only way the project will impact.
“We know that this measurement is misguided. A clear example is the Shps [SHPS] 50 kilometers away from indigenous lands and still cause a significant impact. The mileage does not show a correct measurement criterion. And the recommendation of the MPF is to ensure that any proposed change to the wording of the resolution 26/07 does not restrict the mileage for assessing whether or not the project will impact the Indian lands, “said Marcia Zollinger Attorney Barry during the meeting of Consema Thursday morning, 20 September.
In the recommendation issued by Consema, prosecutors argued the necessity of compliance with the Convention 169 of the ILO (International Labour Organization) on indigenous and tribal peoples, signed by Brazil in 1989 and ratified in 2002, which provides that Governments must consult the peoples concerned, through appropriate procedures and in particular through their representative institutions, whenever they are legislative or administrative measures which may affect them directly.
According to prosecutors, in the case of Resolution of Consema, as this is a standard that has to be respected as law, indigenous peoples must participate in the discussion of the proposed amendment. In addition, indigenous peoples have the right to be consulted before issuing the licence of projects and activities that may cause direct or indirect impacts on indigenous lands, regardless of distance.
“All people have standards and rules that must be respected. This new resolution aims, in our view, to destroy the whole cultural principle that we Indians have. Our culture, our beliefs, hunting and fishing are [sic] based in balance with nature. This is our concern the impacts caused on of our beliefs and way of life of our community, “said Porumakuda, one of the indigenous representatives who attended the meeting to express the understanding of indigenous people about the proposal of Consema.
Participation of Funai -another item of the amendment concerned the participation of Funai. For the MPF, Funai has to participate and monitor all phases of the environmental licensing process. The proposal to amend the resolution excluded the organ of examination of prior environmental impact study and study of indigenous component, an integral part of EIA for projects and activities that impact indigenous lands.
The proposal to amend the resolution emerged from the discussion and vote on tariff Consema until the approval of the regulation of complementary law 140. After the regulation of the law, the composition of the Commission for drafting the new text of the resolution will be recast.
According to prosecutors, the recommendations made by the MPF will continue paying for the preparation of the new text of Resolution 26/07 of Consema.
The Consema consists of Councillors of organs and entities representing public authorities, organized civil society entities and non-governmental environmental organizations.
Communication advice Commonwealth Attorney in Mato Grosso

Leave a Reply

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

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com 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: