Negligence or Genocide? The humanitarian crisis in the Yanomani Indigenous Land in Brazil

Abstracts

1. Introduction

Between 2019 and 2022, there was an exponential increase in hunger in the Yanomami Indigenous Land (TIY), accompanied by a significant rise in mortality rates, particularly among children, due to malnutrition and associated causes. Severe food insecurity was part of a wider humanitarian crisis marked by multiple forms of violence, both direct and indirect, including homicides, sexual abuse and exploitation of girls and women, slave-like labor conditions, forced displacement, environmental degradation, and the absence of basic services such as healthcare and education. The expansion of illegal mining activities within the TIY during this period was a decisive factor in triggering the crisis. Mining operations led to environmental destruction, contaminating essential resources for life in the forest, and causing profound and abrupt changes in sociocultural dynamics, which proved equally violent and undermined the foundations of the Yanomami people's food sovereignty.

This article seeks to deepen our understanding of mass violence and genocide by examining the humanitarian crisis affecting the Yanomami. My primary sources include official communications, reports issued by public agencies responsible for the Yanomami’s welfare, assessments conducted by non-governmental organizations - particularly those led by indigenous communities themselves - and other pertinent documents. Through the lens of biopolitics, I explore the distinction between actively causing death and passively allowing death to occur, a critical differentiation for genocide studies. In both academic discourse and public perception, causing death is typically associated with direct violence as an intentional act while allowing death is understood as the result of omission or structural violence.

Accordingly, this article aims to bridge the conceptual gap between these two notions: killing (direct violence) and letting die (structural violence), and to examine how this dichotomy obscures a genocidal dynamic that is particularly evident in the case of the Yanomami. The convergence of government interests, mining operations, agribusiness activities, and drug trafficking, all operating together under a neoliberal rationality, highlights the urgent need for new moral and legal frameworks to accurately define and address genocide. In the case of the Yanomami, intentional inaction played a crucial role in creating and maintaining conditions of hunger and malnutrition. As Murray (2024) notes, political agency significantly influences the effectiveness of so-called “natural events” as instruments of atrocity and famine. In the case under analysis, however, the situation extends beyond natural events and is more closely associated with “man-made events”.

I therefore emphasize the political nature of hunger and its deliberate use as a tool for the destruction of the Yanomami people as a collective subject of rights, facilitating the expansion of mineral exploitation in the Amazon region. This process is a fundamental part of a broader political project based on the predatory exploitation of natural resources. Brazilian indigenism, developed historically from the time of conquest to the present, has been less a spontaneous practice of defending indigenous rights and more a state instrument for control, integration, and administration, albeit often couched in the language of protection.

João Pacheco de Oliveira (2016) argues that, throughout the twentieth century, indigenism operated as a way to reorganize indigenous peoples along new social lines, often through the creation of “administered tribal societies.” He highlights how the State shaped indigenous identities to serve its own interests, whether to justify territorial occupation or to integrate indigenous peoples into economic and political projects. Indigenous policies in Brazil have historically served as instruments of “tutelage” and “administration,” especially following the establishment of the Indian Protection Service (SPI) in 1910 (Lima, 1995). However, under the administration of Jair Bolsonaro, these policies took on an even more harmful character, particularly concerning lands considered economically valuable for agribusiness and mining interests.

Talking about genocide is an extremely serious matter, as is the case with anti-indigenous violence. However, it is common for indigenous peoples and other actors, when invoking this category in public forums, to be seen by “experts” as employing the term figuratively:

In order to contribute to the legal framing of the grave human rights violations suffered by the Yanomami people, I will now address the concept of famine genocide. Although still underexplored in Brazilian literature, famine genocide has gained increasing recognition in international genocide studies, particularly through the works of James Tyner (2018), Alex de Waal (2018), and Elizabeth Murray (2024). In essence, famine genocide describes contexts in which hunger is used as a weapon of mass destruction, with the deliberate intention of exterminating, in whole or in part, ethnic, racial, religious, or national groups, according to the criteria established by the 1948 United Nations Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide. This concept reinforces the idea, initially articulated by Amartya Sen (1981), that while mass hunger is often perceived as the result of natural disasters or economic failures, it is, in most cases, caused or exacerbated by state policies aimed at eliminating or subjugating specific groups.

2. The Yanomami

The Yanomami are a recently contacted Indigenous people who inhabit the Amazon region spanning Brazil and Venezuela, where they strive to maintain their traditional way of life, closely tied to the land and the forest. They represent one of the largest Indigenous groups in South America, with a population of 27,152 individuals (Instituto Brasileiro de Geografia e Estatística, 2023), distributed across approximately 370 communities within the 9,664,975 hectares of the Yanomami Indigenous Territory (TIY). Yanomami social organization is characterized by small, autonomous communities composed of extended family units and a semi-nomadic pattern of territorial occupation. Self-identified as Peoples of the Forest, the Yanomami possess a complex cosmology in which urihi (land-forest) is understood as a living organism, where all elements - plants, animals, mountains, rivers - are endowed with spirit.

The Yanomami see themselves as an inseparable part of urihi. For this reason, environmental destruction of their territory causes effects that go far beyond the already catastrophic damage to their physical health. Thirty years after the demarcation of the TIY, between 2019 and 2022, a new wave of territorial invasion began, driven by illegal mining activities with compounding and overlapping impacts. During this period, the area affected by illegal mining increased by 3,350%, reaching 3,272 hectares within the TIY (Hutukara Associação Yanomami and Associação Wanasseduume Ye'kwana, 2022). With state complicity and support, mining operations evolved to the point of receiving substantial financial investment and logistical infrastructure. The activity has taken on an industrial scale, multiplying its destructive impacts. The situation is further aggravated by the dismantling of Indigenous public policies and the repeated failure of public authorities to provide assistance (Brasil, 2023e).

In recent decades, during Brazil´s military dictatorship (1964–1985), the Yanomami experienced widespread devastation from diseases such as malaria, measles, sexually transmitted infections, whooping cough, and malnutrition, resulting in significant loss of life in several villages. The National Truth Commission report also exposed the role of the Brazilian State in perpetrating violence in Indigenous territories, including cases of forced displacement, kidnapping, the establishment of concentration camps, and violent executions.

In 1993, the infamous “Haximu Massacre” marked the first case recognized as genocide by the Brazilian judiciary, taking the lives of 16 Yanomami individuals in the midst of violent conflict with illegal gold miners (Rocha, 2007). However, the conflict with miners reflects a broader and more complex issue. Although illegal mining has plagued the Yanomami Territory for a long time, its scale and severity have increased dramatically over the past five years. Miners are responsible for mercury contamination of rivers, deforestation, the sexual abuse of Indigenous children, and the reckless spread of diseases, including Covid-19. They have also created security threats in the region, intimidating healthcare workers and preventing Indigenous communities from accessing food and medicine. The Oswaldo Cruz Foundation² (Fiocruz) reported that anti-malarial drugs from the Ministry of Health intended for the Yanomami were diverted and sold by miners, a crime that is still being investigated. In 2021, the Hutukara Associação Yanomami (HAY) reported that vaccines against Covid-19 intended for Indigenous people by the Yanomami Special Indigenous Health District³ (DSEI-Y) were being exchanged for gold by public officials.

In the case of the Yanomami, there is a clear correlation between the intensification of mining activities and the increase infectious diseases, notably influenza and pneumonia. The devastating impact of illegal mining has promoted the spread of malaria, as mining craters form stagnant pools, ideal breeding grounds for disease-carrying mosquitoes. Due to their relative isolation, Indigenous communities have weaker immune defenses against diseases commonly found among non-Indigenous populations, resulting in a disproportionately high rate of fatal outcomes.

Territorial encroachment, deforestation, river contamination, and the pollution of water sources pose serious challenges to traditional livelihoods such as agriculture, hunting, fishing, and fruit gathering, which constitute the primary means of subsistence for these communities. Rivers used for drinking water have been contaminated with mercury from mining operations, compromising both water supply and fish populations, a vital source of food. Mercury ingestion leads to neurological disorders and lifelong disabilities. Health professionals and various institutions have reported an increase in neurological diseases among newborns in Yanomami communities due to mercury exposure. Mercury, used in mining to extract gold from rock, poses a grave threat to both environmental and public health. A study released in August 2022 by Fiocruz estimated that 45% of the mercury used in illegal mining is dumped into rivers and streams of Amazon without any treatment or mitigation (Brasil, 2023a).

During this period, approximately 50% of Yanomami children under the age of five were affected by malnutrition, as reported by Brazil’s Unified Health System (SUS). Data from the Secretariat of Primary Health Care for Indigenous Peoples, under the Ministry of Health, revealed that 2021 recorded the highest percentage of children with low or severely low weight-for-age (Brasil, 2023b). Mercury contamination exacerbated this crisis, leading to diarrhea and further contributing to childhood malnutrition.

In January 2023, Brazil was shaken by the release of distressing images showing children living in deplorable conditions, accompanied by the alarming revelation that at least 570 children had died from preventable diseases over the previous four years. According to the Ministry of Indigenous Peoples, 99 children between the ages of one and four died in 2022 due to malnutrition, pneumonia, and diarrhea. Data from the Special Secretariat for Indigenous Health (SESAI) revealed that approximately 56% of the children under observation in the region suffered from acute malnutrition, presenting dangerously low weight for their age in 2021 (Metrópoles, 2023).

The situation was further exacerbated by the dismantling of Indigenous healthcare services. In addition, the invaders have taken control of important infrastructure, such as airstrips and health posts. The violence associated with illegal mining has prevented the presence of medical teams and obstructed the delivery of medicine and food. Deprived of subsistence and medical care, the health of the sick deteriorates rapidly. As Indigenous economies depend on family-based labor, traditional subsistence activities become unviable when the disease spreads, creating a vicious cycle of hunger, physical weakness, and scarcity (Instituto Socioambiental, 2023).

Among the main factors in this crisis are the collapse of Indigenous healthcare services and the invasion of mining operations, which have triggered a cascade of sanitary, environmental, sociocultural, and economic repercussions in the affected communities (Brasil, 2023d). The government of President Jair Bolsonaro⁴, who took office in 2019, has systematically dismantled Indigenous health institutions, exacerbating pre-existing deficiencies. The onset of the Covid-19 pandemic further exacerbated and exposed the severity of the situation. Many analysts have pointed to a possible famine-driven genocide orchestrated and executed by the Bolsonaro government between 2019 and 2022, which only came to light in 2023.

Bolsonaro’s rhetoric and inflammatory policies directly impacted Indigenous communities, encouraging violent actors and resulting in levels of devastation reminiscent of the military dictatorship. Throughout his presidential campaign, Bolsonaro often belittled Indigenous peoples, signaling his intentions. In 2016, he repeatedly promised to annul and reduce demarcated Indigenous territories if elected. In 2017, he doubled down on his stance by pledging to halt any new demarcation efforts and promised to guarantee firearm access for farmers. He also vowed to dismantle the National Indian Foundation⁵ (FUNAI), the federal agency responsible for Indigenous lands.

Under his administration, Brazil witnessed an alarming increase in Indigenous land invasions, homicides, infant mortality, forest fires, deforestation, water and soil pollution, and disease outbreaks (Brasil, 2023c). This article argues that none of these occurrences were merely incidental or accidental. Analysis of official documents, reports, and civil society assessments reveals a deliberate effort to dismantle Indigenous ways of life. This systemic effort was supported by a narrative steeped in racism and ethnocentrism.

For years, Indigenous peoples, represented by various organizations, have denounced an ongoing genocide in Brazil. Their voices, however, are not always heard, despite being documented in communications to the federal government and international bodies. Luiz Eloy Terena recounted a disappointing but common response from the government to Indigenous demands during the COVID-19 pandemic:

This text adds to analyses that support the view that Indigenous genocide in Brazil is not mere rhetoric, but fact. Taking the recent case of the Yanomami as a basis, one gains insight into the broader context in which similar dynamics are unfolding across various regions and affecting numerous Indigenous peoples.

3. Making die and letting die

Biopolitics encompasses various perspectives explored by scholars such as Michel Foucault, Roberto Esposito, Giorgio Agamben, Antonio Negri, and Judith Butler. Although their approaches differ, they share a common goal: to understand how life -bios - has become intertwined with politics. Biological life has evolved from being merely an object of political action to influencing the very core of political governance and its mechanisms of managing and regulating the population.

Michel Foucault expands this understanding of biopower by asserting that modern societies are not solely disciplinary but also normalize individuals and populations. This transformation within political law does not replace the old sovereign law but adapts it to the demands of liberal-capitalist modernity. Instead of showing the power to kill, attention is turned to governing living beings considered productive for a neoliberal capitalist society, while those considered surplus are relegated to neglect and possible death. So, how is the division made between those who should live or be left to die? Racism plays a key role, with races being classified and hierarchized, determining superior and inferior groups - those considered useful and those considered expendable.

The elimination of the degenerate or abnormal race is seen as essential for securing a healthier and purer life for the rest (Foucault, 2019, p. 215). This analysis of power sheds light on how the Brazilian State neglects the lives of indigenous peoples, who are seen as social burdens within the capitalist system. The history of omissions goes back to ancient times, but I want to emphasize the turning point initiated by the government of President Jair Bolsonaro, which exposes the use of the government machine to let the Yanomami people die, but also make them die intentionally.

The notion of necropolitics, introduced by Achille Mbembe (2018), serves as a useful analytical tool for understanding the contemporary political practice of making people die. Mbembe argues that the central aim of sovereignty is “the generalized instrumentalization of human existence and the material destruction of human bodies and populations” (Mbembe, 2018, p. 10-11). To construct the concept of necropolitics, he relies on the premise that the ultimate expression of sovereignty lies in the power to decide who may live and who must die. According to Mbembe, this separation of subjects entails a biological division, in which one group is marked with the sign of death while the other is to be preserved. The categorization of bodies into those who should live and those who should die is not random; it is intrinsically connected to factors such as gender, race, and class. Among these, Mbembe emphasizes race as the predominant factor, given the explicit experiences of domination in colonial contexts and in the societies that emerged from them. In other words, race or racism constitutes the core of death politics; it is the primary criterion for defining the bodies upon which these policies will act. Within this framework, there exist structures aimed at the destruction of certain groups. These structures represent contemporary forms of life subjected to the power of death - that is, forms of social existence in which vast populations are relegated to conditions that confer upon them the status of “living dead,” confined to “death zones.”

However, in order to fully understand the gravity of the State's responsibility and intentionality in relation to the deaths of individuals residing in these “death zones,” it is crucial to unravel the intricate dynamics at play between actively causing death (killing) and passively allowing it (letting die), particularly when these fatalities are attributed to hunger. In normalized societies, death policies are largely enacted through inaction, neglect, and the failure to address or prevent violent acts perpetrated by third parties.

The subject of genocide must be examined through this lens, lest its practical meaning be diluted by a detachment from contemporary reality. This is precisely the approach proposed by James Tyner, who challenges the dichotomy between killing and letting die. Tyner focuses on what lies between these two forms of sovereign power, emphasizing the element of intentionality that bridges violence by commission and violence by omission (Tyner, 2018). This logic allows for a reassessment of how genocidal practices are understood, particularly in relation to the unequal condemnation of direct and indirect strategies.

Mass killings capable of wiping out entire populations have accompanied humanity throughout history, manifesting in diverse forms of violence. Genocide,⁷ however, refers to a particular mode of human extermination - one that takes root in state practices and has been codified as an international legal category in the post - World War II era. Coined in 1943 and incorporated into International Law in 1948 in response to the traumatic experience of Nazism, genocide is a modern term created to designate atrocities that were emerging globally and that appeared to incorporate new elements, such as the instrumentalization of terror and the elimination of divergent identities, all in the service of advancing political and economic projects backed by a group with hegemonic aspirations.

In 2005, the United Nations Security Council Resolution 1593 recognized the potential presence of crimes against humanity in the deaths of millions due to hunger and malnutrition in Darfur region of Sudan, in the midst of a prolonged conflict⁸. This led to the case being referred to the International Criminal Court to determine culpability. Despite the precedence in Sudan, the situation of mass starvation was often portrayed merely as a natural calamity, avoiding any discussion of intentionality or genocide. Regrettably, similar narratives persist in several other instances.

Amartya Sen’s work contributed significantly to the development of critical thinking on hunger, marking a shift in the prevailing understanding of its causes from climatic and demographic factors to social and political ones (Marcus, 2003). Sen’s (1981) argument that poverty should not be seen merely as a lack of income or material resources, but rather as the deprivation of basic human capabilities such as access to adequate food, healthcare, education, economic opportunities, political participation, and freedom of choice, had a profound impact on the understanding of poverty within a broader political dynamic of exclusion and death. Sen emphasized that hunger and poverty do not stem only from the shortage of food or resources, but are deeply rooted in social, political, and economic injustices that restrict individual freedoms. His analysis operates primarily at the structural level and interrogates the systemic violence perpetuated by the capitalist system and the unequal distribution of resources. Hunger, therefore, is not the result of abstractions or natural events; it is political, as it is produced through human actions and omissions. As Alex de Waal (2018, p. 185) asserts, “famine is transitive: it is something people do to one another”.

Traditionally, in analyzing cases of human rights violations, international tribunals have reinforced the dichotomy between positive and negative obligations. Direct physical violence - such as torture, summary executions, and wartime sexual violence - has tended to be the primary focus of accountability efforts, particularly individual responsibility, as seen in the International Criminal Court. Failures to provide food and medicine, to prevent third-party violence, and other forms of omission are rarely prosecuted, even when they result in the deaths of thousands (Tyner, 2018). It is as if deaths from hunger or disease were regarded as second-class, or less deserving of moral outrage, than deaths by “bullets, poison gas, torture or machete” (De Waal, 2018, p. 193).

A crucial aspect of the discourse surrounding genocide intertwined with scenarios of severe hunger revolves around Galtung's categorization in 1969 of direct violence, where there exists a discernible perpetrator of the act, and structural violence, which has no clear perpetrator. Galtung made a distinction between these forms, noting that direct violence involves evident actors responsible for their actions, while structural violence operates insidiously, often without a clear identifiable perpetrator. According to him,

Although analytically interesting, legally this definition allows for a vacuum of responsibility that is being debated recently, especially after the Darfur case. An important element in the legal-political definition of genocide is intentionality, which is absent in Galtung's definition of structural violence. Can we assign culpability for a crime when there is no discernible intent? According to the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide, acts must be committed with the “intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnic, racial or religious group” (Organização das Nações Unidas, 1951, Article II).

Authors such as Tyner, Rice, Green, Murray, Gupta and de Wall are important readings for problematizing the theme of intention, that is, the rapprochement between the ideas of killing and letting die (Green, 1980). Can we equate the intention of a shooter who pulls the trigger with that of a lifeguard who witnesses a drowning swimmer but fails to act?

According to Alex de Waal (2018),

Tyner and Rice (2015) puts the question in terms of agency. Killing is considered an action while letting die is perceived as an omission or lack of action. However, when we think about the examples of the shooter and the lifeguard, this dichotomy takes on another proportion. In this sense, inaction can be considered a criminal omission imbued with intentionality when it is possible to discern the presence of three conditions: ability, opportunity, and awareness.

The authors also propose a reversal in the case of structural violence: are they aware of harmful policies and practices? Do they have the opportunity to remedy the damage? Is there the financial or political capacity to prevent them? The difficulty is in demonstrating how and which acts caused the mass starvations and how to bring those responsible to justice.

In light of these issues, I analyze documents and speeches from the Bolsonaro administration to highlight its intentionality in the genocide of the Yanomami peoples of northern Brazil, killing them or letting them die. Racial motivations will become more evident through public speeches given by Bolsonaro himself, while economic incentives will be discernible in decisions that reflect both criminal actions and omissions. The main method of harming indigenous communities is through the exploitation of environmental degradation caused by mining activities in the region, in addition to the violence present in the relations between goldminers and indigenous peoples. This instrumentalization of miners is an ingenious way of masking the responsibility of the government.

Mass starvation can arise from natural disasters or as a result of the State's failure to prevent it, but it is often provoked. We must go beyond examining the causes and consequences of starvation to emphasize accountability, criminal liability, the identification of perpetrators, and the protection of victims (Edkins, 2007).

4. The genocide of the Yanomami

David Marcus (2003), when discussing crimes of hunger under international law, classifies four forms of government participation in a mass hunger crisis. Fourth-degree faminogenic behavior is the least deliberate. Typically, incompetent or hopelessly corrupt governments, faced with food crises created by drought or price shocks, are unable to respond effectively to the needs of their citizens. Starvation follows, although the government itself may not desire this result.

Third-degree faminogenic behavior is marked by indifference. Authoritarian governments turn a blind eye to mass starvation. Second-degree faminogenic behavior, governments implement policies that themselves engender famine, then recklessly continue to pursue these policies despite learning that they are causing mass starvation. Finally, first-degree faminogenic behavior is intentional. Governments deliberately use hunger as a tool of extermination to annihilate troublesome populations. For the author, second-degree and first-degree can be considered crimes under International Criminal Law.

During his tenure as President of Brazil, Jair Bolsonaro advocated for policies that would permit exploitative activities within indigenous territories. He sought to shift the responsibility for land demarcation from the Executive to the Legislative branch, initiating reviews of previously demarcated lands and proposing limitations on the recognition of indigenous territories, restricting it solely to those occupied by 1988. His government endorsed and encouraged the thesis of the temporal framework known as “marco temporal” against the principle of indigenato⁹. The “marco temporal” thesis was first defended by the Federal Government, through Funai and the Attorney General's Office (AGU), during the Raposa Serra do Sol case before the Supreme Federal Court (STF) in 2008–2009. It argued that indigenous peoples would only have rights to lands they occupied on October 5, 1988, the date of the promulgation of the Constitution. Although the STF applied the thesis specifically to that case, it did not establish it as a general rule. Later, under political pressure, the thesis was reinforced by AGU Opinion 001/2017, aiming to make it binding across all federal agencies.

In addition, he withdrew Brazil from the 1989 Indigenous and Tribal Peoples ILO Convention. Furthermore, he engaged in intimidating tactics against indigenous leaders who spoke out against these policies and vetoed provisions of a bill that aimed to ensure indigenous peoples' access to water, hygiene, and healthcare during the Covid-19 pandemic.

This onslaught on indigenous territories, leaders, and communities was part of a broader pattern of actions by the Executive power to facilitate the exploitation and private appropriation of indigenous lands. The federal government, along with its allies, has been actively pushing for legislation aimed at undermining the constitutional protections afforded to indigenous peoples and their territories.

The intention to get rid of this despised population and the anti-indigenous racism can be extracted from some public speeches given by Bolsonaro before and during his term as president.¹⁰ One of the most iconic statements was made to the newspaper Correio Brasiliense (1998): “it is a shame that the Brazilian cavalry has not been as efficient as the Americans, who exterminated the Indians”.¹¹ In 2015 he stated: “there is no Indigenous territory where there are not minerals. Gold, tin and magnesium are in these lands, especially in the Amazon, the richest area in the world. I am not getting into this nonsense of defending land for Indians” (Campo Grande News, 2015).¹² In Correio do Estado (2016), he stated “this unilateral policy of demarcating Indigenous land by the Executive will cease to exist. Any reserve that I can reduce in size, I will do so. It will be a very big fight that we are going to have with the UN”.¹³ In a speech at the National Congress, on January 21, 2016, he said “in 2019 we are going to rip up Raposa Serra do Sol [Indigenous Territory in Roraima, northern Brazil]. We are going to give all the ranchers guns”.¹⁴

In 2017, he said, in an interview given to Marcelo Godoy from O Estado de S. Paulo (2017), that “I fought with Jarbas Passarinho [former minister of Justice] right here. I fought with him about the high treason he committed in demarcating the Yanomami reserve”.¹⁵ Still in 2017 he stated that “you can be sure that if I get there [elected President of Brazil] there will be no money for NGOs. If it is up to me, every citizen will have a firearm in the house. There will not be a centimeter demarcated for Indigenous reservations or quilombolas”¹⁶ (Estadão, 2017).

These statements constituted merely a few examples of public statements in the media that had national repercussions. Some of them could arguably be characterized as cases of racism and incitement to genocide. Unfortunately, such statements were not merely rhetorical; on the contrary, they were concretely reflected in the actions undertaken during the presidency of Bolsonaro.

An emblematic example of these actions was Bill 191/2020, initiated by the Bolsonaro administration, which sought to regulate the exploitation of mineral, water, and organic resources within indigenous territories. The text of Bill 191/2020, submitted to Parliament by the President of the Republic, was jointly drafted by the Ministry of Mines and Energy and the Ministry of Justice. Unlike previous legislative proposals on the matter, this bill encompassed not only mining activities but also the exploitation of hydrocarbons and water resources, aiming at the construction of hydroelectric plants on rivers located on indigenous lands.

In addition to coordinating efforts between ministries and the National Congress, the Ministry of Women, Family, and Human Rights (MMFDH), then headed by Minister Damares Alves, sought support from the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights for the approval of the aforementioned legislation. However, it is important to underscore that this initiative faced strong opposition, as it evidently infringed upon the rights of indigenous peoples and posed significant threats to their traditional ways of life. The Government’s commitment to promoting mineral exploitation in indigenous territories, particularly in the Amazon region inhabited by the Yanomami people, was remarkable and highly controversial.

Encouraged by the systematic approval of mining operations in protected areas, the weakening of enforcement agencies and their personnel, and the advancement of laws regulating resource extraction in indigenous territories and conservation units, drug trafficking organizations also engaged in a gold rush after the former president took office. In addition to the acquisition of precious metals, involvement in the mining sector offered extensive opportunities for laundering money from drug trafficking activities (Castro, 2021).

According to information compiled by the Indigenous Missionary Council (CIMI), the criminal destruction of various indigenous lands is accompanied by a significant number of mining requests, covering up to 5.92 million hectares of Yanomami territory. The document highlights that “the overlap of requests made to the National Mining Agency reflects the dystopian scenario experienced by indigenous peoples in the territory, with daily violence and aggression” (CIMI, 2021). There are reportedly over 500 mining requests in Yanomami territory, the majority of which are for gold exploration. As of June 2021, these requests totaled 3.28 million hectares – an area larger than Belgium (Hutukara Associação Yanomami and Amazon Watch, 2022).

At the same time, former Minister of the Environment Ricardo Salles dismissed officials responsible for conducting operations against illegal mining on indigenous lands. This episode, also reported by the Special Commission for the Defense of Indigenous Peoples' Rights of the Brazilian Bar Association (OAB) in a document submitted to Parliament, involved the removal of enforcement coordinators following the success of operations that had curtailed deforestation in the Ituna-Tatá Indigenous Land, after the deforested area had increased eightfold between 2018 and 2019 (Senado Federal, 2021, p. 557).

While promoting mining activities, the Bolsonaro administration sought to suppress dissenting voices. In 2022, the Ministry of Women, Family, and Human Rights (MMFDH) suspended police protection previously granted to Davi Kopenawa, a prominent advocate for the rights of the Yanomami people. Despite having been under official protection since 2014, Kopenawa was targeted in an assassination attempt at the end of 2022, shortly after the suspension of his security detail. The Commission of the Mixed Parliamentary Front for the Defense of Indigenous Peoples' Rights produced a report warning of an increase in the murders of indigenous leaders during the Covid-19 pandemic (Senado Federal, 2021, p. 564).

Throughout the Covid-19 pandemic, the situation of the Yanomami deteriorated significantly. At the outset of the health crisis, there were complaints regarding interruptions in the delivery of food supplies to Yanomami communities. Alisson Madrugal, a public prosecutor in Roraima, reported that the Ministry of Health had abruptly halted the provision of food to indigenous communities at state health posts in 2020, without offering any justification. In the midst of the pandemic, FUNAI not only failed to prevent incursions by illegal miners but also obstructed a medical team attempting to deliver essential aid to the territory.

The Attorney General's Office launched operations to investigate the diversion of medicines within Yanomami territory. According to official findings, in 2022, only 30% of the more than 90 types of medicines designated for distribution were actually delivered. Prosecutors highlighted that the diversion of deworming medications, crucial for treating parasitic infections, left 10,000 out of the 13,000 children living in the region without adequate treatment, thereby exacerbating the crisis of child malnutrition.

Facing extreme vulnerability and ongoing threats, the Yanomami people repeatedly sought assistance from the Government, the judiciary, and international organizations. Despite submitting more than 60 appeals for health assistance to the Bolsonaro Administration and filing over 20 petitions for protection from criminal miners, their pleas were largely ignored (Castro, 2022). Regrettably, no effective measures were taken. Even in the face of court rulings, including those issued by the Inter-American Court of Human Rights, mandating the protection of the Yanomami, the Government willfully disregarded them, allowing the invasions and abuses to persist without restraint (Comissão Interamericana de Direitos Humanos, 2020).

The Yanomami and Ye'kwana District Health Council (Considisi-Y), the Hutukara Yanomami Association, the Articulation of Indigenous Peoples of Brazil (APIB), and the ISA (Socio-Environmental Institute) diligently reported the dire situation to federal agencies, the Public Prosecutor´s Office, the press, and through social media channels. Despite their efforts, these warnings were systematically ignored. The Intercept Brasil revealed that at least 21 letters concerning the case were ignored by various official institutions in just a span of two years (Castro, 2022).

To mitigate the disproportionate impact of the pandemic on Indigenous populations, the Articulation of Indigenous Peoples of Brazil (APIB), in collaboration with six political parties, filed an Arguição de Descumprimento de Preceito Fundamental (ADPF) before the Federal Supreme Court (STF). The action sought the implementation of emergency measures to curb Covid-19 transmission and to expel invaders from seven Indigenous Lands. Simultaneously, the Department of Justice filed a class action lawsuit demanding the Federal Government take immediate action to remove miners from Yanomami land. Although initially denied, the Federal Regional Court (TRF) later recognized the imminent threat and ordered the Federal Government to submit an eviction plan within ten days. This decision was later suspended following a government appeal.

Despite further rulings, including one from the Federal Court of Roraima and a precautionary measure from the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights (IACHR) in July 2020, the Bolsonaro Administration refused to comply, allowing illegal activities to persist. During the review of Bill No. 1,142/2020, which provided social protection measures against Covid-19 in Indigenous territories, the Ministry of Women, Family, and Human Rights (MMFDH) recommended vetoing provisions requiring the Federal Government, states, and municipalities to supply essentials such as potable water, hygiene materials, ICU beds, ventilators, and educational resources.

In a related class action lawsuit concerning the provision of adequate nutrition for Yanomami patients, the MMFDH argued for transferring responsibilities to other agencies. Despite knowledge of severe food insecurity, the government withdrew the Yanomami from food distribution programs, worsening their situation. Presidential vetoes of fourteen provisions of Law No. 14,021/2020 further undermined critical protections, eliminating obligations to provide free access to essential services and food aid during the pandemic.

Furthermore, alongside the presidential veto concerning universal access to water, as initially stipulated in the legislative text for Law No. 14,021, the implementation of the Cisterns Program, aimed at providing potable water to indigenous territories, was halted in 2020 under the tenure of Minister of Citizenship, Onyx Lorenzoni, as highlighted in the Senate Parliamentary Commission of Inquiry Report (Senado Federal, 2021, p. 564).

The Federal Senate's Parliamentary Commission of Inquiry on Covid-19, commonly referred to as the “Pandemic CPI” further acknowledged the Federal Government's complicity in the preventable deaths of indigenous peoples. A section of its report was dedicated to assessing the impact of the health crisis on indigenous communities, recognizing the deaths of indigenous peoples as part of a broader strategy aimed at harming this vulnerable population.

In 2020, alongside a reduction in federal funding allocated to the Special Secretariat for Indigenous Health – the lowest in the past eight years – successive measures were implemented to expedite the dismantling of the National Indian Foundation (Funai), leading to a continued contraction of its overall budget. As outlined in the General Balance of the Union (BGU), indigenous health policy became a focal point in the broader assault on the rights of these populations in 2019.

According to the 2023 report by INESC (Institute of Socioeconomic Studies), Funai transformed into a de facto anti-indigenous institution, experiencing a decline in financial execution between 2019 and 2022, despite a concurrent rise in the indigenous population. In 2010, Funai's per capita budget was R$899 per indigenous individual, but by 2022, this figure had dropped to R$400, representing a reduction of over 50%. The number of Funai employees per thousand indigenous people fell by 68% during this period. Similarly, resources allocated to the Special Secretariat for Indigenous Health (Sesai) within the Ministry of Health also decreased by 9% from 2019 to 2022, exacerbating the detrimental effects of epidemics, such as the tragic situation of the Yanomami people (INESC, 2023).

The inadequate investment in public policies for indigenous peoples stands in stark contrast to the relentless attacks faced by these communities in the first half of 2021, whether through territorial invasions or the introduction of numerous bills in Congress aimed at dismantling constitutionally guaranteed rights. As highlighted by the Pastoral Land Commission, violence in rural areas reached a record high during the Bolsonaro administration, the highest recorded since 1985. These attacks continued to escalate into 2021 and 2022.

An analysis by ABRAJI (Brazilian Association of Investigative Journalism) indicates that a significant portion of federal resources allocated for indigenous health remained underutilized during the pandemic, and when used, proved inefficient. According to reports from INESC (2020), ABRAJI (2020), and ISA, the first half of 2021 witnessed poor execution of public funds intended for the health of indigenous communities. Only 39% of federal funding allocated for pandemic mitigation among indigenous populations was utilized in the first half of 2020, with a mere 1% of the budget expended for this purpose in the first half of 2021. Furthermore, it remains uncertain whether all food aid and supplies purchased actually reached the intended communities. Information from transparency disclosures by Funai and the Ministry of Women, Family, and Human Rights remains incomplete.

The Covid-19 pandemic has exacerbated an already dire situation of hunger, disease, and violence. The combination of the pandemic and deliberate government actions that facilitated illegal mining and sought to weaken - or even eliminate - the presence of indigenous peoples culminated in an unprecedented crisis of mass starvation.

5. Conclusions

In November 2019, the Human Rights Advocacy Collective (CADHu) and the Dom Paulo Evaristo Arns Human Rights Commission (Arns Commission) submitted a communication to the International Criminal Court (ICC) in The Hague, accusing President Jair Bolsonaro of crimes against humanity and incitement to genocide against Indigenous and traditional communities in Brazil.

The complaint, grounded in Article 15 of the Rome Statute, detailed a series of actions and omissions by the Bolsonaro administration that allegedly endangered Indigenous populations. These included the dismantling of environmental and Indigenous protection policies, weakening of oversight institutions, encouragement of illegal deforestation, and failure to demarcate Indigenous lands. The organizations argued that these measures constituted systematic attacks that could lead to the destruction of Indigenous groups, thereby meeting the criteria for crimes against humanity and genocide as defined by the Rome Statute.​ The ICC acknowledged receipt of the complaint and indicated that it would conduct a preliminary examination to assess whether to initiate a formal investigation into the allegations (Comissão de Defesa dos Direitos Humanos Dom Paulo Evaristo Arns, 2019).

On August 9, 2021, the Articulation of Indigenous Peoples of Brazil (APIB) filed a formal complaint with the International Criminal Court (ICC) in The Hague, accusing President Jair Bolsonaro of committing genocide and crimes against humanity against Indigenous and traditional communities. This unprecedented action marked the first time that Indigenous peoples directly approached the ICC with their own legal representation to defend their rights. Bolsonaro has been the target of different complaints at the ICC for crimes against humanity and genocide, whether in the context of the dismantling of policies to protect indigenous peoples, environmental destruction or due to his management of the pandemic in relation to minorities. The APIB complaint states that:

The Special Commission for the Defense of the Rights of Indigenous Peoples of the Brazilian Bar Association, in document no. 2,770, reached the following conclusion:

The series of actions and omissions perpetrated by the federal administration—explicitly directed and orchestrated by the President of the Republic, with the participation of high-ranking officials such as the Minister of Justice, the Minister of Health, the Minister of the Environment, the President of FUNAI, the Secretary of SESAI/MS, among others—to be duly investigated alongside any collaborators associated with these political agents, constitutes the central elements of the criminal conduct typified in Article 1(c) of Law No. 2,889 of January 10, 1956, as well as Article 6(c) of the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court. These acts have subjected Indigenous Peoples and Communities in Brazil to living conditions that are likely to result in their physical destruction, whether in whole or in part.The Federal Supreme Court also has initiated an investigation against officials from the government of Jair Bolsonaro over allegations of genocide against the Yanomami indigenous people. The identities of the individuals under investigation have not been disclosed due to the confidential nature of the proceedings.

The United Nations Special Adviser on the Prevention of Genocide, Alice Wairimu Nderitu, stated that she has been monitoring the situation in Brazil from the perspective of the responsibility to protect since 2018. In May 2023, during her visit to Brazil, the Special Adviser for the Prevention of Genocide visited the federal capital and the states of Roraima, Mato Grosso do Sul, and Rio de Janeiro. In her press statement at the conclusion of her visit to Brazil, Alice Wairimu Nderitu pointed out that illegal mining in Yanomami territory has been the source of widespread violations and abuses against the Yanomami people, as their rights to access and use land, healthcare, and education have been severely and adversely affected (Nações Unidas Brasil, 2023)

The mass starvation endured by the Yanomami people, brought to public attention in early 2023, stands as a stark manifestation of the cumulative consequences of policies personally endorsed by the President and operationalized through an organized and hierarchical governmental apparatus. This apparatus encompasses multiple ministries and supervisory entities constitutionally tasked with the protection of Indigenous populations. In flagrant violation of the principles of alterity and cultural pluralism, the federal government engaged in a deliberate campaign aimed at inflicting physical and psychological harm upon Indigenous peoples, with the dual objective of facilitating their physical eradication or compelling their forced assimilation into the dominant societal framework. This was executed through acts of hostility, the incitement of illegal land occupation, the implementation of assimilationist policies, and systematic criminal omissions. The pursuit of such an agenda was further intensified by the overt desire to exploit natural resources located within constitutionally recognized Indigenous territories.

Both the intent to kill and the intent to let die are evident in official speeches and documents associated with the Bolsonaro administration. The ability, opportunity, and means to act in defense of indigenous populations were clearly available yet deliberately neglected. Thus, the characterization of genocide by starvation deserves rigorous analysis to ensure that those responsible are held accountable.

In the case of the Yanomami, two interrelated layers of complexity become evident. First, there is an economic impetus behind the appropriation of indigenous territories, which, although not explicitly ethnic in nature, results in ethnically targeted consequences. Second, there is the indirect deployment of illegal mining operations as instruments of extermination, through the deliberate incitement of invasions that lead to systemic scarcity, malnutrition, the spread of disease, and ultimately, death. This situation calls for a broader and more nuanced interpretation of international legal norms concerning genocide. As global dynamics evolve, so too must the legal conceptualization of this crime, particularly in view of emerging methods of orchestrating mass death. Within this framework, there are both substantial legal and ethical foundations to support the argument for the recognition of genocide.

References

Edited by

Publication Dates

History