Federal Public Ministry Challenges Law Firm's Fee Claims Against Xikrin Indigenous Community
The Federal Public Ministry contests a law firm's abusive fee claims against the Xikrin indigenous associations, seeking nullification of contracts and compensation for collective damages.
- • MPF contests fee lawsuit filed by a law firm against Xikrin indigenous associations.
- • Contracts from 2017-2020 contained abusive clauses without informed consent.
- • Indigenous rights violated due to lack of interpreter and consultation, infringing ILO Convention 169.
- • MPF requests lawsuit rejection, R$ 200,000 damages, and 5% fine for law firm's bad faith.
- • STF suspended court orders seizing community funds to protect indigenous survival.
Key details
The Federal Public Ministry (MPF) has taken legal action to contest a lawsuit filed by a law firm demanding fees from Xikrin do Cateté indigenous associations. The dispute centers on contracts signed between 2017 and 2020, which included abusive clauses stipulating that the firm would receive 10% to 20% of funds allocated to the indigenous community. According to the MPF, these contracts were signed without proper, informed consent, violating indigenous rights protected under the ILO Convention 169. The indigenous individuals were misled, had no access to interpreters or anthropological support, and did not fully understand the documents they signed, leading to vulnerable consent conditions.
The MPF described the law firm's conduct as predatory, noting that the firm opposed a beneficial global agreement with the mining company Vale, which caused internal conflicts among the Xikrin and fostered the creation of new indigenous associations to maintain control over resources. An attached anthropological report confirmed that the community had no formal access or translation of these contracts.
Previously, state courts ordered the seizure of essential community funds to pay the law firm, but the Supreme Federal Court (STF) intervened to suspend these seizures, citing risks to the survival of the indigenous people. The MPF has requested the total rejection of the lawsuit, nullification of the contracts due to insurmountable defects, and the imposition of collective moral damages of R$ 200,000 to support public policies aiding the Xikrin. A further 5% fine on the lawsuit’s value has also been sought against the law firm for bad faith practices. The MPF argues that even if contracts were considered valid, the firm has no right to fees as it did not achieve success through its efforts.
This legal challenge highlights significant concerns about abusive legal practices imposed on indigenous communities, emphasizing the necessity of free, prior, and informed consultation, and the protection of indigenous rights in Brazil.
This article was translated and synthesized from Brazilian sources, providing English-speaking readers with local perspectives.