|
AKATÚA: PLURALISM AND THE INDIGENOUS
ISSUE IN THE CONSTITUTION OF PARAGUAY
Arnaldo Moraes Godoy
" When Paraguay goes free, when our America goes free, when the
people speak and
give hands through the walls that now contain us, we are leaving then to
Paraguay.
I want to see there where they suffered. The earth has scars that you dry up,
the wild lands conserve millions of soldiers ".
Pablo Neruda, To be Born I was Born, p. 147.
Akatúa is an adjective of the
Guarani language that translation-equivalence dictionaries define as law. That
law is not a monopoly of the State, however, given the obvious decline of
juridical monism as part of the larger project of modernity's
bourgeois-capitalism. Pluralist practices reveal the new focus of an informal juridical
culture, creating new forms of legitimization, that the contemporary State
feigns to tolerate. The present essay examines pluralism in Paraguay, where the
majority of the population has an indigenous origin. In that country, the
constitution intends to recognize pluralism, as a precondition for survival.
The law, in other words, seems to legitimate the broader definition of akatúa.
The Latin-American historical
experience in general, however, seems to demonstrate the zero value of such
legitimization. Winners have always imposed (with violence) their normative
system on the losers. This has been true since the days of Bartolomeu of Las
Casas, patron of all Latin American libertarian causes, who was born in
Seville, Spain, in 1474. After an early experience in the Dominican Republic at
age twenty-eight, he returned to Europe and was ordained as a priest. In 1511
he went back to America. Three years later, while living in Cuba, he was
galvanized into a life-long defense of the Indians, by the horrible,
brutalizing conditions that they were forced to live under. He documented these
in his General History of India (1527), traveled to Mexico (1531) and to
Nicaragua (1534), was bishop in Chiapa, and continued his battle back in Spain,
where he entered into debates about the existence of the Indian soul. In 1566
the tireless fighter died in Madrid.
Europeans of his day believed
in the physical reality of Éden, which they centered in American topography.
From their perspective, they tamed this paradise, through the creation of an
Indian law, which offered a particular vehicle for European Law to encompass
new geographical and human situations, with unequaled flexibility, extending to
vast territories a juridical tradition rejuvenated for new solutions that
circumstances demanded of it. Such a supreme organ made it possible for the
king of Spain to exercise jurisdiction over Spanish America, with a competence
to rule over mining, local and regional, both being marked by a strong
canonical influence. Cabildos and encomiendas proliferated, as a template for
protectionist legislation, implemented by the Church, a perfect legalism that
promoted imperfect justice. It turned the Indians into slaves, under protective
and conservative rules, that legitimated their submission, considering as it
did the native people as fatally lacking any juridical capacity. Natives were
seen as wild infidels.
To acquire any understanding
of the Latin American situation today, one must look to the beginning of
colonization, where Spanish America was constituted as a mere attaché of the
kingdom, being governed by the same laws and authorities of the metropolis. But
the breadth and depth of new problems demanded a larger political personality
in the New World, which forced some independence for local government and
legislation matters. In 1524, the Spaniards organized the Real and Supreme
Council of India. In 1680, Carlos II’s Recompilation of Laws was implemented.
It sought to reduce to a single juridical unit the diversity and the pluralism
of the Indian common law, an empirical model that had been formatted over the
years. Privileged juridical status was granted to the Indians, theoretically,
for all privileges were gauged by incapacities and limitations. The Indigenous
law was also a source of Indian law, although poor in content, which could only
exist where it’s norms did not oppose Catholic religion, the dominant morals,
or the laws of the kingdom, in which case, it was annulled it its totality. The
Spanish did not care much for the heathen's family authority, for example. The
hunger, the cross and the sword decimated the family as constituted in the poet
Neruda’s image. For Neruda, freedom in America can only be the daughter of our
facts and of our thoughts.
The consequence for the
Indians was an early death on an individual basis, and a cultural death in
general. It is calculated that in two and a half centuries of colonization the
native population went from one million to eight thousand and two hundred,
putting aside the Guaranis of the Jesuit Republic. A heroic vision of the
conquest, a "histoire événementielle", was formatted as if Assuncion
had roots in the durable fruit of certain men's decisions. The official
historiography left out the concept of freedom. And freedom is not a juridical
invention, nor a philosophical treasure, property loved by civilizations
somehow worthier than others, because they know how to produce or to preserve
it.
The presence of Guaranis in
Rio Paraguai and in Chaco is said to go back to immemorial times. They
witnessed the foundation of Assuncion, the presence of the Jesuits and their
thirty missions. They were massacred by the Spaniards and by the Portuguese
slavehunters; people such as Antônio Raposo Tavares, who is metamorphized by
history into a fearless explorer, through the metaphor of the Bandeiras, who
were credited with Brazilian territorial extension. In 1811, Paraguay was freed
of Spain. Under the leadership of José Gaspar Francia, the country was
reconstructed, despite implacable imperialistic opposition. Francia died in
1840 and was followed by Carlos Solano López, who developed the politics of
autonomous industrialization, which was an irritant for British capitalism.
English diplomacy manipulated its allies in South America, such as Brazil,
Uruguay and Argentina, feeding the War of Paraguay, and the American genocide,
which removed the life of two thirds of Paraguay’s population.
The Brazilian official
historiography in the 70’s mourned the Brazilian heroes, volunteers of the
homeland, idyllic characters within the reminiscences of the campaign of
Paraguay. Julio José Chiavenatto, however, in a controversial work, denounced
Brazilian cruelties, such as those of Conde D’Eu, the emperor's son-in-law:
" But the great criminal of that war is Conde D’Eu, son-in-law of Pedro
II, that replaced Duque de Caxias in command of the army starting from 1869.
Conde D’Eu has a fantastic chronicle of crimes that he committed in that war
(...). He closed up the old hospital of Peribebuy, with all the patients -
mostly elderly and children -shut up inside. Then he ordered it set on fire.
While the hospital burned, the Brazilian troops were ordered by that crazy
blonde prince to use their bayonets to push back the patients that tried to
escape the bonfire. One doesn't know, in American history at least, any war
crime bigger than that. To set on fire a hospital and to kill the patients! To
burn alive the elderly and children "
Little peace or politically
stability followed for Paraguay thereafter. From 1932 to 1935 the Paraguayans
faced Bolivia, in the War of Chaco. In 1936, radical officials launched a
revolution, seasoned by agrarian reform and by that nationalization of the
economy justified by Simon Bolivar, for whom "generous souls are always
interested in the luck of a people that improves in recovering rights that the
Creator and nature endowed ". The dictatorship of Stroessner (1954 to
1989) was toppled in turn when commandant Andrés Rodrígues seized power. Juan
Carlos Wasmosy, from the red party, was elected in 1993, and soon faced the
army commandant, Lino Oviedo, who attempted in his turn a coup d’etat. Oviedo
was arrested, condemned by sentence of the Supreme Court, had this decision
overturned by an extraordinary military tribunal and then was re-convicted by
the Supreme Court which considered unconstitutional the ordinance that had
cleared him.
The Guarani in Paraguay have
lived under these eternal conflicts among the dominant elite of both Paraguay
itself and of neighboring nations. The undeniable native presence is seen in
language, habits and rules, spontaneously pressing the official normative model
which is found in constitutional texts, and which has gradually had to notice
this special cultural and sociological reality. The recognition of indigenous
rights acknowledges a stubborn pluralism, as can be seen by examining two
Paraguayan constitutions, the one of August of 1967 and the one of June of
1992.
The Paraguayan constitution
of 1967 prescribed Spanish and Guarani as national languages, but guaranteed to
Spanish the official use (article 5). The constitutional text of 1992 enlarged
the acceptance of the native languages, proclaiming Paraguay a pluricultural
and bilingual country. Spanish and Guarani are official languages (article 140);
however, article 18 of the current constitution of Paraguay determines that in
case of doubtful interpretation, it is preferable to rely on Spanish. The
indigenous languages, as well as the ones of other minorities, is said to form
part of the cultural patrimony of the nation, and thus Paraguay waives with
tolerance at pluralism. This is certainly contrary to Brazil, that reserves
only to Portuguese the quality of official language (article 13 of the
Constitution of the Republic) although, as one might realize, Brazil does not
have too many existing natives.
The Paraguayan Constitution
of 1967 reserved for Catholicism the position of official religion, without
damage to that religious freedom that the normative text tried to guarantee
(article 6) and at the same time restrict by reference to good habits and
public order (article 70). The Paraguayan constitution of 1992 subtracted this
status from Catholicism (article 24). It is prescribed that the relationship
between the State with the Catholic Church is based on independence,
cooperation and autonomy. It must be stressed, however, that any reference to
autochthonous religious practices would be a waste of time, since the presence
of the Jesuits had long accomplished the ideological task of imposing Roman Catholic
beliefs and effecting cultural assimilation.
The Paraguayan Constitution
of 1967 conceived agrarian reform as one of the fundamental factors for
obtaining stability and a sound economy, defining progress as the incorporation
of rural populations in a wider economical and social development of the nation
(article 128). The Constitution of 1992 enlarges that perspective excessively,
prescribing that " the indigenous people are entitled to community
property of land, in extension and enough quality for the conservation and
development in peculiar ways of life. The State will provide them gratuitously
of lands, that will not be susceptible for warranty of contractual obligations,
for lease, besides the tributary immunity‘. (article 64).
The Paraguayan Constitution
of 1967 didn't determine a normative space for indigenous issues. The
Constitution of 1992 has chapter V for this matter, which recognizes the
existence of indigenous peoples, defined as groups of cultures previous to the
formation and constitution of the Paraguayan state (article 62). It is accepted
that (and here the law of indigenous people is guaranteed to preserve and to
develop) ethnic identity is linked to a respective habitat (article 62). Rights
to the free expression of political, social, cultural and religious values are
granted, besides voluntary subjection to native rules, as long as they do not
challenge fundamental rights established in the Constitution (article 62).
Jurisdictional conflicts will take into account the indigenous common law
(article 62). Rights to participate in the economic, social, political and
cultural life of the country are guaranteed to indigenous peoples, in
consonance with their common law, the constitution and the laws of the State
(article 65). Global transformations have tended to grant full and immediate
effectiveness to norms of human rights, tendency that raises airier exegesis of
Paraguayan texts now under comment. The State will recognize cultural
peculiarities of indigenous people, especially in what it links with formal
education. There will be defense against population decrease, depreciation of
the habitat, environmental contamination, economical exploration and cultural
alienation (article 66). The natives are immune to civil or military services,
instituted in law (article 67).
The Paraguayan constitutional
tendency announces to the world a change of paradigm, one that reinvents a more
benevolent relationship, in agreement with Leonardo Boff’s warning, that
inspires larger collaboration among several peoples, cultures and religions,
all indispensable conditions for the accomplishment of the human project, one
open for the future and for the infinite. The integration of Mercosur, under
the stigma of human rights and plurality, doesn't go any further without
respect and reverence for the “Indian of the black hair which falls on her
shoulders”, whose sweetness of the glance shares the akatúa kingdom, the empire
of law and the respect for a lost dignity.
BIBLIOGRAPHY
ANZOÁTEGUI, Victor Tau. Que
fue el Derecho Indiano. Buenos Aires: Abeledo-Perrot, s.d.
BECÚ, Ricardo Zorraquín.
Historia del Derecho Argentino. Buenos Aires: Editorial Perrot, s.d.
BELLA, ISMAEL SÁNCHEZ ET
ALLII. Historia del Derecho Indiano. Madrid: Editorial Mafre, 1992.
BOFF, Leonardo. Ethos Humanos. Brasília: Letraviva, 2000.
BOLIVAR, SIMÓN. Political
writings. Campinas: Unicamp, 1992.
BRAZIL. Constitution of the
Republic of Brazil. São Paulo: Saraiva, 2000.
CANESE, NATALIA KRIVOSCHEIN
& ALCARAZ, FELICIANO . Dictionary Guaraní-Español. Assunción: Universidad
Nacional/Ediciones y Arte S.R.L., 2001.
CERQUEIRA, DIONÍSIO.
Reminiscences of the War of Paraguay. Rio de Janeiro: Livraria do
Exército Editora, s.d.
CHIAVENATTO, Julio José. American genocide: the War of Paraguay. São Paulo: Brasiliense,
1979.
CORREAS, Carlos J. Massini. Los Derechos Humans en el Pensamiento Actual. Buenos
Aires: Abeledo-Perrot, s.d..
COSTÁZAR, Fernando García
and CROSS-EYED, José Manuel González. Breve Historia de España.Madrid: Alianza
Editorial, s.d.
CRUZ, NICOLA ET ALLII. Nueva Historia del Chile. Santiago.
Academical Printed Papers, 1977.
DONGHI, HALPERIN. History of
Latin América. Rio de Janeiro: Paz and Earth, 1975.
DUARTE, Paulo of Queiroz. The Volunteers of the Homeland in the War of Paraguay. Rio de
Janeiro: Livraria do Exército Editora, 1988.
EYZAGUIRRE, Jaime. Historia
del Derecho. Santiago.Editorial Universitária, 1998.
GALEANO, Eduardo. The Century
of the Wind. Rio de Janeiro: New Border, 1988.
HOLLAND, Sérgio Buarque.
Vision of the Paradise. São Paulo: Brasiliense, 1992.
LAS CASAS, Bartolomeu of. The Destroyed Paradise. The Bloody History of América Spaniard's
Conquest. Porto Alegre: L&PM, 1996.
LEVENE, Ricardo. Manual de Historia del Derecho Argentino.
Buenos Aires: Ediciones Depalma, 1985.
LÉVI-STRAUSS, Claude. Sad Tropics. São Paulo: Company of
Letters, 1996.
LUGON, C. The Communist
Christian Republic of Guaranis. Rio de Janeiro: Paz and Earth,
1977.
LUNA, Félix. Breve Historia de Argentina. Buenos Aires:
Planet, 1917.
MARTINEZ, Hugo Tagle. Historia del Derecho Constitutional
Derecho Indiano. Santiago: Editorial Juridical Chile, s.d.
______. Historia del
Derecho Constitutional. Derecho
Indígena. Santiago: Editorial Juridical Chile, s.d.
NERUDA, Pablo. To be born I
was born. Rio de Janeiro: Bertrand Brasil, 1996.
PARAGUAY. National
Constitución. Assunción: s.e., 1992.
PELLEGRINI, Miguel Angel Ortiz. Historia del Derecho Argentino. Córdoba: Marcos Publishing Lernes,
s.d.
ROMERO, José Luís. Breve Historia de la Argentina. Buenos Aires: Fondo of Cultura Económica, 1996.
SILVA , José Afonso. On the
Application of Constitutional Rules. São Paulo: RT, 1968.
WEIS, Carlos. Contemporary Humans Rights. São Paulo:
Malheiros, 1999.
WOLKMER, Antonio Carlos
(org.). Right and Justice in
Indigenous America. Porto Alegre: Livraria do Advogado. 1998.
______. Juridical pluralism. São Paulo: Alpha-Ômega, 1994.
|