1. Introduction
On April 2, 2024, the Brazilian state issued the first official apology to Indigenous peoples during the first collective reparation session for the Krenak and GuyarokáIndigenous communities sponsored by the Amnesty Commission associated with the country’s Ministry of Human Rights and Citizenship. Although the session established the period of the dictatorship as the target time for reparations, the apology extended to the entire past of persecution of Brazil’s native peoples, which has lasted over 500 years. As a Brazilian pursuing a master’s degree in human rights, I attended the event. Being there was like seeing my country’s past, present and future all at once.With this piece, I aim to describe the most critical moments of the session. I will provide a brief historical context about Brazil. Despite being Brazilian, the story of the Indigenous peoples of Brazil is not mine. I will narrate it from the perspective of a white viewer.
2. Brazilian background
Brazil’s dictatorship lasted from 1964 to 1985. This period was characterized by the construction of an image of a strong and effective state, a disguise for the spread of disinformation, branding those who opposed the regime as communists. This practice originated in the United States and became widespread throughout the country.Censorship of artistic movements and the persecution of anti-dictatorship groups were other characteristics of this period. Despite initially providing economic expansion at the expense of destroying the Amazon rainforest and other natural resources, Indigenous peoples were held as communists and a stumbling block in the growth of Brazil’s agribusiness.
By branding the Indigenous peoples communist enemies, the government gave a political and judicial justification to the persecution, torture, violence, and murder of countless peoples. Under the guise of economic growth and state protection, the dictatorship carried out yet another historical moment of genocide of Indigenous peoples. The lies that the government spread during that period are difficult weeds to exterminate, and they persist in the country’s culture, religion, and politics.
The dictatorship-stained politics in Brazil continues to be threatened by the ghosts of the old military movement. Its allies are in pivotal Congress positions. The fake news machine has changed its focus but still has the same format of religious alienation and protection against an imaginary communist enemy.
In addition to European colonization, which initially promoted Indigenous ethnic cleansing and land expropriation, the dictatorship period has entrenched a culture of hatred towards Indigenous people, cultural erasure and, consequently, a Westernized education without memory that mimics countries like the USA and reinforces a mongrel complex that denies and is ashamed of its origins, hiding an almost infamous truth: Brazil (the entire territory) is Indigenous land.
If Europeans stole Indigenous lands before, in the last century, the state and agribusiness have repeated the feat.The Portuguese Crown rule is gone, and the population has mixed. However, today’s agribusiness, yesterday’splantation, is still alive inside the Congress, with an astonishing ruralist caucus that is working to continue taking land and destroying native forests.
The Marco Temporal Bill is a wretched proposal that ridiculously aims to restrict Indigenous lands according to the period of the constitution: the Indigenous people who were currently occupying the land in 1988 (the year the constitution was promulgated) could “keep” the land, while the rest would have no claim rights. If the idea is to make a temporal distinction, then recognize that the Indigenous people were on the land long before all of us colonizers and are, therefore, the owners of all the land in Brazil.
The time frame is an attempt by the ruralist caucus to rearrange land that had already been unduly appropriated to benefit the extensive food and farming industries, industrial mining, and quarrying. It is saying yes to deforestation and foreign exploitation of Brazilian land, contributing to the accumulation of capital in the hands of billionaires and indirectly financing the military and the extreme right.
The history of Brazil is told (to this day) as if Brazil was a land without an owner that the Portuguese (European colonizers) discovered, depriving of agency people who were already there and who had always treated the land, the water and nature as part of themselves and not as property. It was not a discovery. It was a theft.Brazilian educational institutions reproduce institutionalized memories with the selective and displaced memorialization of European heroes, a characteristic of violence during (and post) armed conflicts.
2.1 Amnesty and its Ambiguity in Brazil.
The term amnesty in Brazil has particular meanings.By the end of the dictatorship, the Amnesty Law was used to describe the military’s self-amnesty so that they could escape investigation and conviction. The military perpetrators have never been held accountable. They kept monetary and political benefits supported by various governmental arrangements, including the current president, Lula, whom, despite my admiration for his progressive work, I cannot help but criticize when he decides to silence demonstrations to recover the memory of the dictatorship events so as not to fall out with the military.
The same week that the Indigenous reparations session took place was also the 60th anniversary of the dictatorship regime, and no official demonstrations of any kind were allowed in the country by the federal government. Lula’s longstanding policy of appeasement is not always the best course of action. Still, I shall spare him the criticism because this year, there will be municipal elections, and the Brazilian far-right is very articulate online and misrepresents criticism of the government by manipulating facts and creating narratives in their candidates’ favour.
When people talk about amnesty in Brazil, there is unease about using the term. In the past, it was used to benefit the military and their families. Many people are calling for an end to this amnesty, including me. For the current Amnesty Commission, this term is a hope of reparation for the wronged Indigenous people who were never enemies of this nation. That is why amnesty in the country today is more related to the recovery of memory, the recognition of wrongs and the correction of past mistakes than an amnesty for the perpetrators.
3. Indigenous Reparation and Feminism – Brazil: past, present, and future.
Given this Brazilian context, let’s move on to the Indigenous reparations session. Joênia Wapichana, chair of the National Indigenous People Foundation (FUNAI, in Portuguese), the Brazilian governmental Indigenous affairs agency, was among the first to speak.
She was keen on recovering memory for Indigenous peoples and legibility. “Knowing where we came from will guide us to where we are going.” “Memory cannot simply be erased; it corrects mistakes and produces success in the administration of a country. Indigenous memory needs to be made public. We need to be seen, not just in reports. Legibility promotes reparation and guarantees the change of public policies in the future. We want this first session, which covers two peoples, to be the beginning of recognizing the memories of all the Indigenous peoples of Brazil. The Indigenous peoples of Brazil are not one; they are several. The data on the Indigenous population shows a decline; what has happened to these peoples? There has been a sharp drop in Indigenous land in Brazil; where have these lands gone?”
Federal congresswoman Célia Xakriabá, an Indigenous representative, gave a powerful speech about rescuing the country’s Indigenous culture through women’s narratives. She talked about the fact that Indigenous people (women) needed to take up political positions so that their stories would be heard and their causes would gather supporters. She also spoke on how she considered the Brazilian Congress “the Cabrals of the 21st century” when they approved the Marco Temporal Bill (alluding to what is taught in history classes about Brazilian lands being “discovered” by Pedro ÁlvaresCabral). The congresswoman used Indigenous props to empower her feminist speech, highlighting the strength of Indigenous women by applying concepts such as capability, legibility, and intersectionality between Indigenous rights, human rights, and women’s rights, acurrent debate for the feminist movement.
“To address environmental damage is to address spiritual damage and cultural damage. There can be no reparation without recognizing the violence committed against Indigenous peoples; the Indigenous peoplesresisted the military dictatorship. They (the state) tried to erase our language; they killed our people as if they were burning a file, but they will not erase our memory. You can only recognize human rights if you recognize the land, the river, and the value of the territory for our people. It is essential to ask for forgiveness, but it is also important to put an end to the murder of Indigenous female leaders and guarantee the demarcation of our lands. Those who have territory have somewhere to go back to; they have a mother, they have a lap, and they have healing.” Her speech was a cry for legibility: the state must recognize the Indigenous people with practical actions.
The congresswoman’s imposing speech moved away from that of Indigenous representative Djanira Krenak. Djanira is an older woman who is a leading shaman for the Krenak people. She was on the bench telling her story and receiving the state’s official apology. Djanira’s survivor speech was transgressive; she spoke out without fearing reprisals, cultural white taboos, lack of support, stigma, and shame.
The Amnesty Commission provided her with a safe space. Ironically, she could only speak her mind because a group of white people granted her safety, especially Amnesty Commission’s president, Professor Eneá de Stutz. A white woman who is promoting the Indigenous intersectionality of the Brazilian feminist movement and who knelt to ask forgiveness on behalf of the Brazilian state for the Indigenous peoples covered in this session.Amnesty commissions in Brazil may be used to give victims a voice and encourage reparations. That is the lesson this new commission has given the country.
In Mrs. Djanira’s beautiful speech, full of ancestral wisdom, her posture was humble, her tone serene, soothing, and welcoming even to her perpetrators. She used a narrative of sadness and suffering and caused great commotion in the audience. Mrs. Djanira did not intentionally apply perfect victimhood concepts. She was not trying to manipulate the facts. But I do believe that she learned that as a non-white woman with no economic means, she needs to say what the state wants to hear: a captivating speech that causes pity and sensitization.
Mrs. Djanira’s speech was a message to the state, almost as if she had said: “I have learned the narrative of the perfect victim because I need your help to save my people. I have legibility. See me. I deserve your efforts.” Would a speech of power that reveals feelings of pain, such as anger and resentment, have been so moving?Would the Brazilian state validate a woman who expresses her hatred as a victim deserving reparations? Who are we bearing witness? Why?
Mrs. Djanira gave listeners a history lesson that Brazilian schools do not. Brazilian education vilifies Indigenous culture and enhances the white man, continuing a cultural erasure. Brazilian children do not learn about Indigenous culture at school. She had no obligation to teach the audience, but she did anyway.
Narratives about the colonization and dictatorship in Brazilian education promote unbalanced memories between victims and perpetrators, with selective memorialization that promotes the homogenization of Indigenous peoples as if they were one and hegemonic masculinities that weaken and marginalize women.
On the other hand, the colonial myth that Indigenous people need education is still there. She apologized for her not-good Portuguese skills. Indigenous are not illiterate; their language manifests itself in other ways that white (European, Western) culture does not know or understand.They do not need to receive a colonial education. They already have an educational system.
Oral history is a vital aspect of Indigenous education.Storytelling keeps Indigenous language and culture alive, something that white literacy does not cover. During the dictatorship, Indigenous people were prevented from speaking their language, and the stories died in the memory of those who were murdered or killed by white diseases. The recovery of Indigenous memory is an ally of the Brazilian transitional justice process. The empowerment of indigenous women’s narratives, orality, and transitional justice boost the Indigenous feminist movement that can save the Amazon rainforest and benefit the entire planet.
Mrs. Djanira spoke about the violence suffered in the Indigenous concentration camps during the dictatorship.The Krenak reformatory was an institution of extermination and torture, and the body of evidence is abundant. There is no doubt that this happened. They were held in precarious conditions, and everyone was tortured: children, older people, and women. They were prevented from communicating in their language, a deliberate murder of the language, and cultural cleansing.
She talked about the gender-based violence her people had suffered, rape and disappearances. But she placed great emphasis on symbolic, spiritual violence. She said: “Water is the father and the mother.” “The greatest pain for my people was losing our sacred river. Our relationship with the river goes beyond a physiological need common to every human being to hydrate. In the river’s waters, we fish, prepare food, drink, wash our clothes, educate our children, and perform spiritual rituals.The riverbanks provide us with the medicines we need.Bathing for the Indigenous people is not purely a hygiene ritual; it is a connection with the protective spirits and a bond ritual with ancestral wisdom.”
“Losing our sacred river was the greatest pain I have ever felt. The water is like a member of our family. It was like someone we love has died. Nowadays, the river is contaminated, and we cannot even wash our hands. To lose the river is to lose everything.” The land, too, she added. Given the Indigenous leader’s connection to spirituality through water and land, the removal of these assets is a form of gender-based violence, as it takes away her strength to weaken the group. It is not about losing material goods, as white people may think. It is still about losing their livelihoods, wiping out generational memories, yet armed conflict violence. Indigenous peopleshave always been killed over land, and she said she did not always understand why this happened. Today, they are asking for help to recover the land. Land that is theirs!
The discussion of Indigenous reparations is not about doing the Indigenous people a favour; it is a step forward in the debate about preserving the environment and is a mature reflection of the practical struggle against climate change. Collective reparation for intergenerational trauma needs to be translated into economic reparation. The only way to make amends and prevent the past from repeating itself is to demarcate Indigenous lands. The Brazilian state urgently needs to return the territory of the Krenak people.
It is necessary to rebuild the state’s relationship with Indigenous peoples by actively recognizing that Brazil is an Indigenous land and that the Indigenous peoples are not the property of the Brazilian state. Brazil’s Indigenous peoples are the actual owners and protectors of the land.Therefore, Brazil needs to strengthen its transitional justice system.
During the session, a white man took the floor and made a speech about his professional achievements in supporting Indigenous rights. A white man thought he should discuss himself during an Indigenous reparation session. A white man thought that whatever he had to say was more important than the accounts of the Indigenous representatives who were there to speak. If you are a white man and keep asking where the perpetrators are, the perpetrator is you! If you look at history, even well-meaning men have committed human rights violations.However, I do not want to spotlight male speeches. For this text, the speeches of white men have been intentionally silenced.
Women were indeed not the main perpetrators of violence during the conflict periods. In addition to being victims, women need to be seen as the holders of knowledge about the harm that has been done to them and placed as protagonists of change. Empowering Indigenous women will save memory, Indigenous culture, and the Amazon rainforest. Brazil’s Indigenous revolution is in the hands of women.
Just like Aya Gruber’s book analyzes the past to point to a future for the feminist movement despite not understanding how it will be reached, with this piece, I humbly reflect on Brazil’s past and point to a direction for feminism in the country: the intersectionality with Indigenous feminism. I do not think that the non-carceral feminism proposed by Gruber is a realistic idea for countries in the global south. In Brazil, we do not have a strong state that guarantees social and gender justice. The weak post-colonial state is still trying to establish public policies that welcome the plurality of its people.Admitting a non-carceral fate for perpetrators of domestic violence today would be as if the state accepted abetting femicide. The macho culture resulting from the social organization process of colonization is prominent.Looking at the culture of cities in the inner side, women are still undervalued in political and economic power relations despite occupying most university spots, which places them as holders of intellectual capital but subjugated to men.
The devaluation of women in Brazil is a colonial legacy. Gender attributions that marginalize women were not a reality in pre-colonization Indigenous South American communities, and that is why I believe that the rescue of Indigenous memory is the future of the country’sfeminist movement, a rescue of women as leaders, a paradigm shift in the place women occupy in society outside the domestic environment.
Transitional justice can be a way out of a new, non-carceral feminism by promoting memory, orality, collective apologies, the return of land, and financial reparations that find gender justice in the future.Transitional justice is a tool capable of giving agency to Brazilian Indigenous women. Setting a timeframe for reparations provides a realistic perspective for the practical application of transitional justice. This first Indigenous reparations session was an essential step towards strengthening the memory of a post-colonial state that does not know its history. The Indigenous and white women represent a feminine communion for a better future for the country. I am honoured I could be there.
4. Bibliography
Almeida, Eneá de Stutz e. The Brazilian transition: memory, truth, reparation and justice (1979-2021). Salvador, BA: Soffia10 Assessoria Socioculturais E Educacionais, 2022.
Anthony W. Pereira. Ditadura E Repressao: Autoritarismo E O Estado De Direito No Brasil, No Chile E Na Argentina [Dictatorship and Repression: Authoritarianismand the Rule of Law in Brazil, Chile and Argentina]. São Paulo: Paz e Terra, 2010.
APIB. “Marco Temporal.” Accessed April 14, 2024. https://apiboficial.org/marco-temporal/.
Brighenti, Clovis Antonio. “Agitadores e Subversivos: Repressão, Perseguição e Violações Dos Direitos Indígenas Pela Ditadura Militar [Rioters and Subversives: Repression, Persecution, and Indigenous Rights Violationsduring the Military Dictatorship].” Perspectiva 38, no. 1 (March 27, 2020): 1–24. https://doi.org/10.5007/2175-795X.2020.e61997.
Caroline Oliveira. “60 anos do golpe: Brasil não fez acertode contas com o passado e vive com legados da ditadura[60 years since the coup: Brazil has not settled its accounts with the past and lives with the legacies of the dictatorship].” Brasil de Fato, March 28, 2024. https://www.brasildefato.com.br/2024/03/28/60-anos-do-golpe-brasil-nao-fez-acerto-de-contas-com-o-passado-e-vive-com-legados-da-ditadura.
Diélen Borges. “Mulheres São Maioria Na Universidade, Mas Minoria Em Gestão e Docência Superior [Women Are the Majority at University, but the Minority in Management and Teaching in Higher Education].” Comunica UFU. Accessed April 14, 2024. https://comunica.ufu.br/noticias/2024/02/mulheres-sao-maioria-na-universidade-mas-minoria-em-gestao-e-docencia-superior.
Editora da UFPB. Justiça de transição: direito à justiça. à memória e à verdade [Transitional justice: the right tojustice, memory and truth]. Editora da UFPB. João Pessoa: Editora Ufpb, 2022.
Gruber, Aya. The Feminist War on Crime: The Unexpected Role of Women’s Liberation in Mass Incarceration. 1st ed. Berkeley: University of California Press, 2020. https://doi.org/10.2307/j.ctvxhrhq6.
Guesse, Érika Bergamasco. “Vozes Da Floresta: A Oralidade Que (Re)Vive Na Escrita Literária Indígena[Voices from the Forest: The Orality That (Re)Lives in Indigenous Literary Writing].” Boitatá 6, no. 12 (October 9, 2011): 104. https://doi.org/10.5433/boitata.2011v6.e31196.
Leatherman, Janie L. Sexual Violence and Armed Conflict. 1st ed. War and Conflict in the Modern World. Newark: Wiley, 2011.
LIVE| 4th Plenary Session to Analyze Amnesty Applications, 2024. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H4ZRyd03TVE.
Otero Quezada, Edith, Lívia De Souza Lima, and Julia Roth. Feminisms in Movement: Theories and Practices from the Americas. Gender Studies. Bielefeld: transcript Verlag, 2023. https://doi.org/10.14361/9783839461020.
Phillips, Tom, and Tiago Rogero. “Brazil Apologizes to Indigenous People for Persecution during Dictatorship.” The Guardian, April 3, 2024, sec. World news. https://www.theguardian.com/world/2024/apr/03/brazil-indigenous-people-apology.
Roychowdhury, Poulami. Capable Women, Incapable States: Negotiating Violence and Rights in India. 1st ed. Oxford University Press, 2020. https://doi.org/10.1093/oso/9780190881894.001.0001.
Sweet, Paige L. The Politics of Surviving: How Women Navigate Domestic Violence and Its Aftermath. 1st ed. University of California Press, 2021. https://doi.org/10.2307/j.ctv20dsb3k.
Szlachta, Tatiane Soethe, and Geovan Martins Guimarães. “Colonização e Genocídio: O Caso Dos IndígenasLaklãnõ/Xokleng Na Colônia Grão-Pará [Colonization and Genocide: The Case of the Laklãnõ/Xokleng Indigenous People in the Grão-Pará Colony].” Revista Eletrônica História Em Reflexão 18, no. 35 (February 22, 2024): 33–61. https://doi.org/10.30612/rehr.v18i35.16934.
Teles, Edson, and Vladimir Safatle, eds. O Que Resta DaDitadura: A Exceção Brasileira [What Remains of theDictatorship: The Brazilian Exception]. 1a ed. Coleção Estado de Sítio. São Paulo, SP: Boitempo Editorial, 2010.
“The Brasil: Nunca Mais Digit@l Project.” Accessed April 14, 2024. https://bnmdigital.mpf.mp.br/en-us/index.html.
Priscila Werton
Médica pela UFCG. Defensora do SUS. Feminista. Atualmente reside no Canadá cursando mestrado em Direitos Humanos. Instagram: @priscilawerton
