The Indigenous World 2026: Brazil

Written on 22 April 2026. Posted in Brazil

According to data from the 2022 Demographic Census, Brazil is home to 1,693,535 Indigenous people, representing approximately 0.83% of the total Brazilian population. The census identified 391 Indigenous Peoples (ethnic groups) and 295 Indigenous languages spoken across the country, reflecting a broader recognition of ethnic and linguistic diversity compared to previous estimates.

Nearly 45% of the Indigenous population lives in the Northern region of Brazil, which has the highest concentration nationwide. The state of Amazonas stands out as the state with the largest Indigenous population in absolute numbers, with approximately 490,000 Indigenous people.

The rights of Indigenous Peoples in Brazil are formally recognized in a specific chapter of the 1988 Federal Constitution (Title VIII, "Social Order," Chapter VIII, "On the Indians"), complemented by additional provisions throughout the constitutional text and in the Transitional Constitutional Provisions Act. Furthermore, Brazil ratified ILO Convention No. 169 on Indigenous and Tribal Peoples on 25 July 2002, reinforcing the country's international commitments to the protection of Indigenous rights.

This article is part of the 40th edition of The Indigenous World, a yearly overview produced by IWGIA that serves to document and report on the developments Indigenous Peoples have experienced. Find The Indigenous World 2026 in full here

Land rights and insecurity

Developments in 2025 confirmed that, for Indigenous Peoples in Brazil, peace and security remain inseparable from the stability of their territorial rights. Rather than being experienced as abstract constitutional guarantees, land rights were lived as concrete conditions shaping everyday safety, health, mobility, and collective continuity.^[1],[2] Judicial decisions, legislative initiatives, executive actions and climate governance intersected throughout the year in ways that repeatedly reopened Indigenous territories and rights to dispute, producing uncertainty, exposure to violence, and sustained fear.

From Indigenous perspectives, peace does not mean the absence of conflict but rather the possibility of living, governing, and reproducing collective life in a territory that is not under permanent threat. Territorial stability was consistently identified as the foundation of safety, autonomy, and dignity. Conversely, instability is reflected in hunger, illness, displacement, intimidation, and the erosion of Indigenous governance institutions. In this sense, insecurity in 2025 was not episodic but structural.

Judicial recognition and its limits

In 2025, the Supreme Federal Court (STF) reaffirmed the unconstitutionality of the Marco Temporal thesis (Temporal Framework Thesis), maintaining that Indigenous territorial rights are original and not subject to time limitation. Indigenous organizations welcomed the decision as an important reaffirmation of constitutional principles. It was, however, widely described as a partial and fragile victory.

From Indigenous standpoints, judicial recognition did not automatically result in security on the ground. Numerous demarcation processes remained unfinished, leaving communities exposed to invasion, coercion, and forced displacement. Indigenous leaders emphasized that, when court rulings are not accompanied by enforceable timelines, binding administrative obligations, and effective protection mechanisms, legal recognition itself becomes unstable. Rights that can be reaffirmed and then politically contested once more do not produce peace; they reproduce uncertainty.

Legislative backlash and institutionalized insecurity

Throughout 2025, insecurity was intensified by legislative initiatives seeking to reintroduce restrictions on Indigenous land rights. The Constitutional Amendment Bill PEC 48/2023 advanced as a central instrument of backlash, proposing constitutional changes that would narrow the scope of Indigenous territorial recognition.

Indigenous Peoples interpreted this not merely as a legal dispute but as a political signal that their rights remained negotiable. This signal reshaped power relations in conflict zones, emboldening land grabbers, mining interests, and other private actors. Insecurity was produced not only by means of physical violence but also through state narratives that that considered Indigenous legitimacy relative.^[3]

From a decolonial perspective, democratic procedures were mobilized in order to reactivate colonial logics of dispossession under the appearance of legality.^[4] Indigenous organizations repeatedly stressed that such processes undermine trust in institutions and transform the state itself into a vector of insecurity rather than protection.

Administrative delays as a form of violence

In 2025, bureaucratic delays^[5] were widely understood by Indigenous organizations as a form of time-based violence.^[6] Administrative inaction was not perceived as neutral governance but as a political practice that prolonged their exposure to risk. Each postponed administrative act meant additional time under threat from invasion, contamination, and coercion.

Indigenous leaders insisted that peace cannot be postponed. When constitutional rights exist only on paper while administrative processes stagnate, insecurity becomes normalized. Time, in this context, functions as an instrument through which violence is indirectly reproduced.

Land demarcation policy: advances and limits

Despite these tensions, 2025 also saw concrete advances in demarcation. The federal government formally approved seven Indigenous Lands, presented as part of a renewed commitment to territorial protection.

In August 2025, three Indigenous Lands were approved in Ceará: Pitaguary, Lagoa Encantada, and Tremembé de Queimadas. In November 2025, during COP30 in Belém, four additional lands were approved: Kaxuyana–Tunayana (PA/AM), Parecis (MT), Uirapuru (MT), and Manoki (MT).

In addition, the Ministry of Justice signed ten declaratory ordinances, the National Indigenous Foundation (Funai) approved six Identification and Delimitation Reports (RCIDs),^[7] and a presidential decree regulated Funai's police powers, strengthening its authority to remove illegal occupants from Indigenous Lands.

Indigenous organizations recognized these measures as significant, particularly for communities who had been waiting decades for land recognition. However, they emphasized that the advances remained insufficient relative to the scale of pending land claims and territorial violence. From Indigenous perspectives, demarcation relates not only to land policy; it is also peacebuilding.^[8] When land recognition is selective or slow, insecurity persists.

Territorial conflict, criminal economies, and everyday insecurity

Across multiple regions in 2025, land conflicts were inseparable from criminal economies. Illegal mining, logging, land grabbing, and trafficking routes increasingly intersected with Indigenous territories, often accompanied by armed actors and private militias.^[9],[10]

These dynamics produced daily insecurity: threats against Indigenous leaders, restricted mobility, poisoned rivers, and disrupted food systems.

Indigenous organizations stressed that militarized responses alone were failing to dismantle these structures. Enforcement operations were often episodic, displacing rather than eliminating illegal activities. Defending Indigenous territories thus became inseparable from defending personal safety and political legitimacy,^[11] particularly as Indigenous resistance was frequently met with criminalization, surveillance, and legal harassment.

Major national events: Indigenous mobilization

The Acampamento Terra Livre (ATL) 2025, held in Brasília, reaffirmed Indigenous mobilization as a central practice of peace and security. Thousands of Indigenous participants articulated demands against the Marco Temporal, opposed PEC 48/2023, and called for urgent demarcation of Indigenous Lands and protection.^[12],[13]

ATL functioned not only as a protest but also as Indigenous governance in action. Women, youth, elders, educators, and health agents collectively produced political agendas across issues such as land, health, education, climate, and anti-racism. In this sense, mobilization itself operated as a security strategy: strengthening alliances, countering criminalization, and asserting Indigenous authority in national politics.

Indigenous women and youth

In 2025, Indigenous women and youth were central political actors within the Indigenous movement.^[14]

Women's leadership foregrounded the links between territorial insecurity and everyday life, including food sovereignty, caregiving, community health, and protection from gendered violence. Youth activism connected land dispossession to mental health crises and exposure to urban and rural violence, insisting that security includes the right to a future.

Together, these perspectives challenged dominant security paradigms by redefining peace as care, continuity, and Indigenous governance.

COP-30: Indigenous participation, climate governance, and the fight for territorial rights

The 30^th Conference of the Parties (COP30) to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change was held in Belém, Pará, in Brazil, in November 2025. It marked an historic moment for Indigenous Peoples in Brazil and globally. COP30 brought together over 4,000 Indigenous people, including more than 3,500 representatives from every Brazilian biome (Amazon, Caatinga, Cerrado, Atlantic Forest, Pampa, Pantanal, and the Coastal and Marine Zone).

The Articulation of Indigenous Peoples of Brazil (APIB), the country's leading Indigenous organization, mobilized over 3,000 Indigenous people to Belém with a central demand that land demarcation and territorial protection should be the conference's legacy in Brazil.

Dinamam Tuxá, APIB's executive coordinator, articulated the Indigenous movement's frustration with the structural exclusion from decision-making: “Our peoples, territories, and traditional ways of life are part of the solution to combat the climate crisis but, unfortunately, the Conference of the Parties does not officially consider Indigenous Peoples as negotiators. That is why we have been pressing them for months so that the demarcation of Indigenous Lands is at the centre of the agenda.”^[15]

The Scale of unfinished demarcation

APIB presented compelling data at COP30 revealing the magnitude of Brazil's territorial debt to Indigenous Peoples. According to APIB's survey, 107 Indigenous Lands were ready to be demarcated and awaiting the finalization of administrative processes.

Conflicts and contradictions: Ferrogrão railway and extractive agendas

COP30 exposed deep contradictions within Brazil's climate policy. During the conference, the Brazilian government advanced plans for the Ferrogrão railway, a massive infrastructure project that would cut through Indigenous territories in the Amazon to facilitate soybean and mineral exports.^[16] Indigenous leaders denounced this as emblematic of a broader pattern: governments publicly celebrating Indigenous contributions to climate solutions while simultaneously pursuing extractive mega-projects that threaten Indigenous Lands and livelihoods.

The Conselho Indigenista Missionário (CIMI), a Catholic organization supporting Indigenous rights, used COP30 as a platform to denounce “false solutions” and demand systemic ruptures with climate collapse, explicitly linking land demarcation to the dismantling of extractive capitalism.^[17]

Achievements and limitations

Brazilian Indigenous organizations acknowledged some concrete achievements during COP30. The Brazilian government announced the approval of four Indigenous Lands during the conference (Kaxuyana–Tunayana, Parecis, Uirapuru, and Manoki), framing these as part of Brazil's climate commitments.^[18] Indigenous leaders welcomed these demarcations but emphasized that they represented only a fraction of the 268 territories still awaiting recognition.

COP30 as a turning point

For Indigenous Peoples in Brazil, COP30 represented both an opportunity and a contradiction. It was the largest platform Indigenous movements have ever had within global climate governance, yet it also exposed the limits of participation without power. It generated unprecedented visibility for Indigenous demands, yet it unfolded alongside continued threats to Indigenous territories due to legislative backlash (PEC 48/2023), administrative delays, and extractive mega-projects.

Ultimately, Brazilian Indigenous organizations framed COP30 not as an endpoint but as a moment of mobilization—a space to strengthen alliances, articulate demands, and build pressure for the systemic changes required to address both the climate crisis and the ongoing colonization of Indigenous Lands. As Indigenous voices repeatedly emphasized throughout COP30: peace begins with territory, and climate justice is inseparable from Indigenous land rights.^[19]

Outlook for 2026–2027

Looking ahead, two trajectories remain possible. On the one hand, continued legislative backlash and institutional challenges may prolong insecurity, particularly if land demarcation and enforcement mechanisms remain politically vulnerable. On the other, advances achieved in 2025—combined with Indigenous mobilization and international scrutiny—may open space for more stable, binding commitments to territorial protection.

The central question for 2026–2027 is whether Brazil will consolidate Indigenous land rights as irreversible foundations of peace or continue to treat them as negotiable variables within political and economic disputes.

Conclusion: peace beyond conditional recognition

The Brazilian experience in 2025 demonstrates that peace and security for Indigenous Peoples cannot be reduced to isolated legal victories or administrative acts. It depends on the stability of territorial rights, the dismantling of criminal economies, and the recognition of Indigenous Peoples as political authorities.

As articulated by Indigenous voices throughout the year, peace begins with territory.^[20] Without territorial certainty and Indigenous governance, security remains rhetorical. But, with them, peace becomes a lived reality rather than a deferred promise.

Maria de Lourdes Beldi de Alcântara is a Professor of Medical Anthropology at the Faculty of Medicine of the University of São Paulo. She is also the coordinator of AJI/GAPK Indigenous Youth Action.

This article is part of the 40th edition of The Indigenous World, a yearly overview produced by IWGIA that serves to document and report on the developments Indigenous Peoples have experienced. Find The Indigenous World 2026 in full here

Notes and references

^[1] IWGIA (2025) "The Indigenous World 2025: Brazil." International Work Group for Indigenous Affairs. https://iwgia.org/en/brazil/5726-iw-2025-brazil.html

^[2] Climate Rights International (2025). “Brazil: Congress Intensifies Assault on Indigenous Rights, Environment.” https://cri.org/brazil-congress-intensifies-assault-indigenous-rights

^[3] Ibid.

^[4] Europe Solidaire Sans Frontières (2025). "Indigenous Brazil Retrospective 2025: A Year of Offensives and Resistance." https://www.europe-solidaire.org/spip.php?article77495

^[5] IWGIA, op. cit.

^[6] OCHCR (2025). "Report on Free, Prior, and Informed Consent—Brazil Submission." United Nations Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights.  https://www.ohchr.org/sites/default/files/documents/cfi-subm/free-prior-informed-consent/subm-indigenous-free-prior-indi-peop-93-organizacion-identidad-territorial-ma-stice-input-1.pdf; WWF Brasil (2025). "STF Strikes Down the Marco Temporal but Maintains Risks That Threaten the Demarcation of Indigenous Lands."  https://www.wwf.org.br/en/?93807/

^[7] Government of Brazil (2025). "The government of Brazil advances in the demarcation of ten Indigenous lands." COP30 Brazil.  https://cop30.br/en/news-about-cop30/government-of-brazil-advances-in-the-demarcation-of-ten-indigenous-lands

^[8] IPAM Amazônia (2025). "Demarcation is message of commitment to indigenous peoples at COP30." https://ipam.org.br/demarcation-is-message-of-commitment-to-indigenous-peoples-at-cop30/

^[9] IWGIA, op.cit.

^[10] Climate Rights International, op. cit.

^[11] Mayer Brown (2026). "Brazil's Supreme Court Concludes Ruling on the Indigenous Time Limit Doctrine." https://www.mayerbrown.com/en/insights/publications/2026/01/brazils-supreme-court-concludes-ruling-on-the-indigenous-time-limit-doctrine

^[12] APIB (2025). "We are all APIB: In defense of the Constitution and life is the theme of ATL 2025." https://apiboficial.org/2025/04/05/we-are-all-apib-in-defense-of-the-constitution-and-life-is-the-theme-of-atl-2025/?lang=en

^[13] Amazon Watch (2025). "Growth from the Grassroots: Brazil's 21st Indigenous Free Land Camp.”  https://amazonwatch.org/news/2025/0425-growth-from-the-grassroots-brazils-21st-indigenous-free-land-camp

^[14] Ibid.

^[15] APIB (2025). "In Belém, Pará's capital, indigenous movement demands a legacy of land demarcation and territorial protection for COP30." https://apiboficial.org/2025/11/10/in-belem-paras-capital-indigenous-movement-demands-a-legacy-of-land-demarcation-and-territorial-protection-for-cop30/?lang=en

^[16] Amazon Watch (2025). "Ferrogrão Reignites Conflict Between the Government and Indigenous Peoples at COP30." https://amazonwatch.org/news/2025/ferrograo-conflict-cop30

^[17] CIMI (2025). "COP30: Cimi defende demarcação de terras indígenas, denuncia falsas soluções e reivindica rupturas sistêmicas contra o colapso climático." https://cimi.org.br/2025/11/cop30-cimi-defende-demarcacao-denuncia-falsas-solucoes/

^[18] Government of Brazil (2025). "Governo do Brasil avança na demarcação de dez terras indígenas." https://www.gov.br/planalto/pt-br/acompanhe-o-planalto/noticias/2025/11/governo-avanca-demarcacao-terras-indigenas

^[19] APIB (2025). "In Belém, Pará's capital, indigenous movement demands a legacy of land demarcation and territorial protection for COP30." https://apiboficial.org/2025/11/10/in-belem-paras-capital-indigenous-movement-demands-a-legacy-of-land-demarcation-and-territorial-protection-for-cop30/?lang=en

^[20] Ibid.

Tags: Land rights, Human rights, Indigenous Peoples Human Rights Defenders