The first elected government of Tocantins - after the creation of the new Brazilian state in 1989
- deliberates in favor of the construction of a city, Palmas, to be the capital of the state. In order
to accomplish it, it was essential to choose a site and, subsequently, to expropriate the necessary
land for creating the capital, including urban expansion areas, once the declaration of public
utility was made, established by the government Executive and Legislative branches. In the
lands meant to expropriation, there were properties and rural possessions, some of them in
process of regularization, as well as the towns of Canela and Taquaralto. It was, therefore, a
private land rather than a natural and completely free from occupation site, which included a
discriminatory action brought by the National Institute of Colonization and Agrarian Reform in
1982. From April 1989 to February 1991, it is submitted, supported by the state of Tocantins
government decrees of the Executive and Legislative branches, which deliberated on the area
to be expropriated and not only on the expropriation itself, but also on a set of actions of
expropriation concerning the Judiciary branch. These actions reach the site necessary for the
implementation of the capital, disregarding the discriminatory action in progress, and lands
beyond the necessary, which characterize a deviation of purpose, which is the declaration of
public utility. The data showed that the main instrument for expropriations was the
aforementioned legislative decree, mainly used to cover the lands mentioned in the
discriminatory action, while the decrees of expropriation of the Executive branch regularized
properties in 1979 and 1981. In the course of most of the expropriation lawsuits, from 1989 to
1997, some of the expropriated landowners accept the proposed monetary indemnity and others
sign better agreements, including the transfer of land property in urban and rural lands in
addition to the proposed monetary indemnity. Most of the lawsuits brought by the legislative
decree were cancelled by the absence of the decree of expropriation of the Executive branch.
Due to this, in 1992 and 1993, the current state government makes use of administrative
expropriation procedures, considered friendly expropriation, again supported by the decree of
the Legislative Power. It is emphasized that some of the agreements were not fulfilled by the
State. In addition, the government of Tocantins, in parallel with the expropriation actions, use
arbitrary and abusive dispossessions (1990-1991 and 1999), with the appropriation of the lands
involved, through the administrative cancelation of the property registrations at the registration
notaries, and the creation of new registrations in the notary of Palmas, in the name of the state
of Tocantins. It should be noted that, at the dispossession of 1999, registrations are cancelled,
which origins of the acquisition were on the State or similar institutions. This occurs as a result
of the arbitrary and misleading interpretation of the sentence of discriminatory action, judged
in 1992, but brought to the second instance, in that same year, through a civil action, filed by
the Public Prosecutor of Tocantins and judged in 1997, issued in 1999. These arbitrary and
abusive acts of the state government provoke great dissatisfaction with the victims (the
expropriated landowners), who, first, seek to negotiate with the Tocantins state, without
success, and finally appeal to the courts of the Judiciary branch in search of a resolution to the
problems faced by expropriations and dispossession. Thus, a legal imbroglio begins and a
context of insecurity with regard to property and land ownership is created from the beginning
of the implantation of the city. Due to these facts, this research has as objective to understand
the imbroglio that involves the expropriations and the dispossessions of lands for the
implantation of Palmas, the planned capital of Tocantins, emphasizing the roles of the state
government and the residents of the affected area were emphasized, for whom the lands were
land of living, of labor, of survival; and to whom reparations should ensure, despite significant
changes in habits, the continuity of their way of life. For that, the analysis procedures are based
on documents, bibliography and field research. The impasses involving the government and part of the expropriated landowners that had their registrations canceled in the dispossession
act of 1999 are, firstly, judged in the Court of Justice of Tocantins, which, in 2003, decides in
favor of the government, and later in the Superior Court of Justice, which, in 2005, rule
consenting to those affected by the issue. In response to the unresolved matters, the Courts of
Justice and the National Council of Justice, which in 2010, determines that the sentence decided
by the Superior Court of Justice is in favor of those affected, determining that the notary of
Palmas must restore all the registrations improperly canceled in the last act of dispossession
(1999). In parallel, in the Court of Justice of the State of Tocantins, others affected, who appeals
because of the noncompliance of the agreements in the expropriations considered friendly of
1992 e 1993, have their gain of cause in 2009, 2010 and 2016. Thus, the only issue for the State
of Tocantins is to accept the decisions and new agreements with the expropriated, which implies
new expropriation actions that involves, in addition to the State of Tocantins, the city hall of
Palmas and even the Federal government, as well as the many acquirers of these lands, for
whom land regularization actions are necessary. Thus, after years of struggle, the expropriated
have their demands achieved, with the restoration of their property registrations, which results
in the return of their lands and the due and fair monetary reparations and in urban lands by
means of lieu of the damages paid.
|
