Argentina, Brazil and Paraguay: The triple toxic (agro) border

Argentina, Brazil and Paraguay: The triple toxic (agro) border

Given the prohibition measures of many products in Europe such as Glufosinate, Azinfos methyl, Dichlorvos, Fention, Endosulfan, Malathion among many others, and the increase in investment costs to introduce new ones in the market of developed countries, companies multinationals have responded by exporting those toxins to the Third World.

Already in 1962, the biologist Raquel Carson, when she published her bookSilent Spring, highlighted the harmful consequences for humans and the environment caused by the use of dangerous chemical poisons to combat pests and plant diseases. Later, investigations showed the presence of chlorinated pesticides in the adipose tissue of marine mammals and other vertebrates and even in the blood of humans and breast milk. And it is that pesticides were not created for agriculture, nor requested by farmers: they were a product of war, according to the report Pesticides,The New Invisible Holocaust, made by Graciela Vizcay Gomez, currently selling the technology packageseed-pesticide it is the perfect equation to sustain a corporate power that has grown in an unprecedented way in recent decades.

Vizcay Gomez relates that in the First World War, when Germany was blockaded and the allies banned the importation of Chilean saltpeter and other nitrogenous fertilizers that could be used in the manufacture of explosives, they had a huge stock of nitrates that no one wanted anymore. The chemical industry recycled them and imposed them on the farmer; this is how nitrogenous fertilizers were born. In another case, when the first atomic bomb exploded in the summer of 1945, an American ship was traveling in the direction of Japan with a cargo of phytocides, then declared as LN 8 and LN 14, enough to destroy 30% of the crops. chemicals capable of eliminating all types of plants. Later, in the Vietnam War, these same poisons, with other names such as "Agent Orange", served to destroy tens of thousands of square kilometers of forests, crops and plants (which have not sprung up again), by At the same time, it affected and still affects that human population in an irreversible way, children continue to be born with congenital malformations, blindness, deformities and very high rates of cancer cases. After the aforementioned wars, agriculture served to channel the enormous existing stored quantities of these toxins to keep the large production capacities that had already been assembled running. In this sense, the origin and current actions of the main companies that produce these poisons are no less controversial.

BAYER, the largest producer of pesticides, of German origin, became part of IG Fraben, a conglomerate of German chemical industries that formed the financial base of the Nazi regime. The Zyklon B gas, which was used in the kill chambers, was manufactured by Degesch, a subsidiary of IG Farben. In the case of BASF, the world's largest chemical company also of German origin, it comprises more than 160 subsidiaries and has more than 150 production plants around the globe. Among its products is the pesticide under the trade name Opera, which includes the extremely toxic glyphosate (herbicide) and endosulfan (insecticide); the product has an advertisement that shows a smiling child, with a small plant in his hand and with an extensive soy plantation in the background.

On the other hand, the North American DuPont, already during the Civil War in the USA, supplied half of the gunpowder used by the Union army, also dynamite. It remained a supplier to the US military in both WWI and WWII. He also collaborated on the Manhattan Project, being responsible for the plutonium production plant at Oak Ridge National Laboratory. Of Swiss origin, the Anglo-Swedish SYNGENTA / NOVARI has among its products the famous pesticide Paraquat, sold in more than one hundred countries under the generic name of “Gramoxone”. This product, once absorbed through the skin or lungs, has effects that are irreversible. There is no known antidote for paraquat poisoning. Various organizations from Asia, Africa and Europe filed a complaint against the multinational before the FAO. The company does not respect its article 3.5 which calls to avoid certain extremely toxic pesticides. Last July, the European Court of Justice also ruled against this product.

For its part, the American MONSANTO, has as part of its long history the production of PCB (polychlorinated biphenyls) used in electrical transformers and cause of multiple pathologies, especially carcinogenic. Their collaboration in the creation of Nuclear weapons, since shortly after they acquired Thomas & Hochwalt Laboratories, Monsanto developed a department that played a key role in the Manhattan project from 1943 to 1945, responsible for the production of the first atomic bombs during the Second World War. Production of Agent Orange used in the Vietnam War. Currently known for its Round Up glyphosate, it was condemned in France for misleading advertising, as it was shown to be potentially carcinogenic and disruptive to the endocrine system and to cause harmful long-term effects on the environment. It introduced the first generation of GMOs to the market, becoming the world leader in promoting biotechnology. Currently, it is the world's largest seller of transgenic seeds in Latin America, the United States and Canada. Their crops account for more than 90 percent of all GM crops in the world.

Nuclear weapons and atomic bomb

In 1936 Monsanto acquired Thomas & Hochwalt Laboratories in Ohio and made it its Central Research Department. Between 1943 and 1945, this department coordinated its efforts with the US National Defense Research Committee and was dedicated to the purification and production of plutonium, and to refining the chemicals used as detonators for nuclear weapons.

Full text at:

United Republic of Agrotoxics

Illustration by Pere Ginard

Agribusiness settled in our countries, corrupting political, economic and social structures. The current model of agricultural production in Latin America was marked by the entry of the so-called Green Revolution, in the mid-20th century. Later, it deepened with the entry of transgenic agriculture in the 90s, which requires pesticides to exist. Although the use of these poisons started earlier, it was in the last 20 years when they began to be used in a massive and indiscriminate way.

In 2003, the multinational Syngenta published an ad in the Argentine newspapers Clarín and La Nación baptizing with the name of "United Republic of Soy" to the territories of South America, where soy was grown. Made up of Brazil, Argentina, Uruguay, Paraguay and Bolivia, this region currently covers an area of ​​more than 46 million hectares of GM soy monoculture, fumigated with more than 600 million liters of glyphosate and causes deforestation, such as minimum, 500 thousand hectares per year, which has its correlation in the innumerable complaints that are produced every day for damage to health, ecosystems, agriculture and communities. Obviously, within the logic of the model, this situation always affects, to a greater extent, social groups living in vulnerability, depending on their class, gender, ethnic group or their insertion in certain economic sectors and territories, not only because of the greater exposure to these toxins but also because of the difficulties these groups have in recognizing, disseminating what is happening and dealing with the risks, together with their null influence and participation in the decision-making processes that affect them.

The pesticides do not "disappear" after being applied, but persist in the air, water, and food and end up in the human body, depressing the immune system. This makes people more sensitive to getting sick from different pathologies. The polluted waters spread the toxin to the flora and fauna, causing the death of species, the increase in human poisoning and the contamination of water reserves.

According to the report, published in 2012, titledSoy Production in the Americas: Update on Land Use and Pesticides, conducted by researcher Georgina Catacora Vargas, Brazil and Argentina are the most applied students of the agribusiness model. In relation only to soybean cultivation, Brazil is the second largest producer in the world and Argentina is the third. Both concentrate 90% of the soybean area in the region: 23 million hectares in Brazil, 19 million in Argentina. On the other hand, approximately 36% of the arable land in Brazil, 59 (%) in Argentina and 66 (%) in Paraguay are occupied with soybeans. It should be noted that transgenic contamination has already been verified: in the Iguazú Falls area, a study carried out by the Brazilian Institute of Environment and Renewable Resources (IBAMA) in the Iguazú Park confirmed that transgenic soybean crops, which are abundant in their area of ​​influence, they are the cause of genetic contamination of various plant species. The cultivation of soybeans in the protected area of ​​the park is prohibited by law, but in the united republics of transgenics anything is possible.

Brazil, World Champion in the use of pesticides

Since 2009, Brazil has been the largest consumer of pesticides in the world: it acquires 84% ​​of the pesticides sold to Latin America. On the one hand, the largest companies producing these products, such as BASF, Bayer, Syngenta / AstraZeneca / Novartis, DuPont, Monsanto and Dow, settled in the country. At the same time, it imports thousands of tons of banned pesticides in the countries that produced them, such as the herbicide paraquat and the insecticide parathion methyl. In the global agrotoxic consumption cake, Brazil consumes 19% of the products, the United States approximately 17%, and the rest of the countries 64%.

An investigation carried out by Anvisa (National Agency for Health Surveillance of Brazil) determined that the use of these products grew 93% between the years 2000 and 2010 worldwide, but in the case of Brazil that percentage reached 190%. And it is that in the neighboring country, there is a phenomenon similar to the Paraguayan and Argentine: a deregulated market that progressively increases the area cultivated with transgenics, suffering an explosive increase in the consumption of pesticides.

A report by the Brazilian Association for Collective Health (ABRASCO) revealed that of the 50 products most used in Brazilian crops, 22 are banned in the European Union. The Brazilian Ministry of Health estimates that each year, there are more than 500,000 people contaminated by pesticides, with about 4,000 deaths per year. The largest companies that produce these poisons, such as BASF, Bayer, Syngenta / AstraZeneca / Novartis, DuPont, Monsanto and Dow, settled in the country thanks to a policy aimed at protecting the interests of agribusiness and rural banks in the Brazilian parliament, which paradoxically supports a government that had proposed to make structural changes, such as agrarian reform, which until now have not taken place.

Bayer bears in Copacabana

On the beach of Copacabana-Rio de Janeiro, on the occasion of the 2014 Soccer World Cup were the Buddy Bears, a traveling exhibition of 141 bear sculptures,known as the Art of Tolerance, to promote "the union of peoples." One of the sponsors of this work was Bayer, the German transnational, famously known and questioned for the production of pesticides and transgenics.

It is not surprising that in its corporate responsibility policies, Bayer has made this beautiful spectacle possible to continue to be tolerated in all towns, while continuing to poison millions of Brazilians and people around the world. In the supermarkets of Rio, you can find the shelf of organic products, but no posters, newspapers or magazines that talk about pesticides, GMOs and their consequences.

And now? Who can defend us?

In a militarized country, not only at the time of the World Cup, there are paramilitaries everywhere. In cities like Rio de Janeiro, it is possible to see warships at sea, police helicopters circling the skies, cities where people are contained so that they do not come down from the favelas and hide the reality of most of the population , and that when they go down you can see in their eyes, on their bodies, the marks of poverty, hunger, drugs, corruption, injustice and the neglect of this system, that extractivism deepens more and more, but that it has significant impunity.

This is the case of Santa Teresa Oeste, in the state of Paraná, where a private armed militia hired by the multinational Syngenta came to shoot at point-blank range at a property occupied by La Via Campesina in October 2007, ending the life of Valmir Mota, 32, father of 3 children, who was shot twice and seriously injured six other rural workers. A year earlier, in 2006, Vía Campesina Brasil had occupied the experimental fields of Syngenta (illegal) transgenics in that place, because it was in the buffer area of ​​the Iguazú National Park, which is home to the famous waterfalls of the same name. According to the biosafety law in Brazil, it was forbidden to plant transgenics in an area of ​​10 kilometers of a protected natural area. Thanks to the notoriety of the occupation and the denunciation of social organizations, the environmental authority, IBAMA, sentenced Syngenta to pay a fine of $ 500,000, something that the multinational never did. Later, the Lula da Silva government changed the law, reducing the buffer area to only 500 meters. Syngenta took advantage of Lula's favor to appeal the payment. There is still no final judgment in the case. The occupation of the experimental field was a denunciation of the impunity with which the multinational agribusiness companies operate, invading unique natural areas such as the Iguazú Park, with transgenics and the intensive use of pesticides. Faced with a judicial eviction order, and in a climate of threats and violence by thugs and security guards hired by the Syngenta company, the 70 families they were occupying decided to leave the area in July 2007, pending resolution. definitive.

In October, they reoccupied the countryside to resume their activities in favor of Creole seeds and agroecology, as a measure of pressure for a legal resolution of the conflict. It is at this time, when they were savagely attacked, with firearms fired directly at people, by the security company NF hired by Syngenta. Following the attack, the corresponding complaints were made and a national and global Syngenta campaign was launched outside of Brazil. For its part, the state public ministry made an absurd complaint against ten of the workers who were on the premises that day, blamed for the attack of which they were victims.

Paraguay, fumigated with impunity

In Alto Paraná, right on the triple border, children and adults from the Leopoldo Perrier community, San Cristóbal district, are suffering the consequences of the fumigation carried out on the canola plantations meters from their homes.

At school, children are fainting from the smell, women are suffering miscarriages, and fish, pigs and other animals are dying. The canola plantations practically surround the community and, according to reports, are lands that Paraguayans are renting to Brazilian settlers to grow the plant that is later used to make biodiesel.

An emblematic case is that of Roberto Giménez who filed a complaint, together with the Association of Farmers of Alto Paraná (ASAGRAPA), for the death of his three-year-old son, Jesús Giménez, who died after seven days of suffering from a strange disease , after the fumigations of the plantations surrounding his home were carried out. They denounced the hospital authorities, as they refused to give a diagnosis of the death. Before making the complaint to the prosecution, those affected met with the mayor of San Cristóbal. However, the communal chief told them that to stop using technological advances and modern techniques in the field would be like going back fifty years, thus supporting medical malpractice and covering up the health situation of their community. Later, the affected population resisted the fumigations, mobilizing peacefully, but because of these mobilizations the prosecution charged four people, three of them relatives of the child, members of ASAGRAPA, and its leader, Tomás Zayas. The Prosecutor's Office alleged that they formed a criminal association and made an attempted murder for allegedly firing a firearm into the air. The residents indicated that neither Zayas was present at the mobilization, nor that there were firearms.

Violation of all rights

In Paraguay, the Pediatrics Chair of the Faculty of Medical Sciences of the National University of Asunción reported that 40% of children whose mothers had direct or indirect contact with chemicals were born with some type of malformation, in the area border with Argentina. Already in 2007, the Roundtable for Sustainable Rural Development (DRS Roundtable) filed a complaint against the Paraguayan state, before the United Nations, for the abuses of the human rights of peasant and indigenous communities due to the indiscriminate use of pesticides by monoculture agriculture on a large scale. The first complaints were made by the National Peasant Federation (F.N.C), demanding the national service of quality and plant and seed health (SENAVE), the form ofpesticide application registry of all the companies and agricultural establishments located around the borders of the soybean estates.

For their part, health ministry officials have denied the events and declared that the deaths did not occur due to the application of pesticides. As in Argentina, the legislation is very permissive and it is the Ministry of Agriculture that should regulate and enforce the law on the use of pesticides. But not only does it not. Furthermore, it encourages indiscriminate use by repeating "that they are not dangerous to health."

The Paraguayan people are being bombarded by poisons used in Vietnam, banned in other countries such as the tordón, 2-4-D and parathion to name some of the toxins used in the Paraguayan soybean fields; water for human consumption is almost sewage and there is not a minimum respect for native peoples.

Paraguay ranks sixth in soybean production and fourth as an exporter worldwide. According to data from the General Directorate of Statistics, Surveys and Censuses (DGEEC) of that country, in 2007 extreme poverty in the countryside grew to 24.4%. According to the report by the Network for a GMO-Free Latin America, in February 2014, the increase in soybean production has also meant the substitution of food crops on which the people's food sovereignty depends, by the production of a crop of export that benefits a few (most of them, not Paraguayans) and the disappearance of their native forest and protected areas where indigenous communities live.

80% of the lands of Paraguay are concentrated in 2% of the owners. In the 1999-2000 agricultural cycle, transgenic soybean was incorporated (illegally). The entry of transgenic soybean seeds to Paraguay is similar to that of the rest of the countries in the region. Although Monsanto never patented RR soybeans in the country, the transnational company allowed and encouraged its illegal introduction from Argentina and Brazil, so that once they are disseminated and established on national soil, business producers pay for the use of RR technology. From that moment, the area planted with soybeans was positioning Paraguay as one of the main producers and exporters of soybeans worldwide. This great expansion of soybean crops occurred at the expense of peasant agriculture. Of the 27,000 soybean farms, 45 are owned by companies that cultivate more than 5,000 hectares, whose foreign currency will not stay in Paraguay, but instead go to Brazil because the capital, technology and producers come from that country. This is because Paraguay has some “comparative advantages” for agribusiness, including the price of land where Brazilian occupations do not respect peasant settlements, which they corner and displace. At the same time, the settlements are not protected; the people in their homes are poisoned by the fumigations and the peasants have to literally run from their houses. The same goes for schools. The glyphosate falls into the water, the farm and on the people. In Paraguay most of the departments (provinces) are affected.

Agribusiness in the center of the State

In June 2012, in the district of Curuguaty -a rural area of ​​the most affected by agribusiness-, there was a violent eviction on state-owned lands, claimed as their own by one of the most important landowners in Paraguay: Blas Riquelme. The outcome was the death of eleven peasants and six policemen. This generated a great media campaign where the peasants were branded as invaders. After this, the parliamentary coup against President Fernando Lugo, on June 22, 2012, was crossed by international agribusiness interests that have profited for many years in Paraguay, especially by the Monsanto and Cargill companies. It should be noted that this fact occurred after the appointment by Lugo of a new commander of the police forces, involved as responsible for the operation in Curuguaty, which appears repeatedly in all the chronicles as an addition to the responsibility of the first president in the events.

Before this event, some actions were being carried out against transgenics, from State institutions such as Senave (National Service for Plant and Seed Quality and Health), which a couple of weeks before had prohibited the introduction of a Monsanto seed to the country. With the new government, the seed was released and Senave began to be led by an agro-toxin businessman, peasant and indigenous organizations had worked for two years on a bill to regulate agro-toxins which was rejected, and the law was approved. phytosanitary law, presented by the big soybean farmers.

Later, the organizations began to work on the regulation of that project and on the laws for the regularization of pesticides in areas where the houses are within 100 meters of the radius, where the schools and colleges are located, and a regulation was issued by decree. Regulations that have now also been erased by this Senave president. Now, there is a free way for fumigation in all indigenous peasant communities, so there is no protection at this time.

Cargill is one of the main companies in charge of collecting, transforming and exporting Paraguayan soybeans. Its main market is Argentina, where it is processed. This company entered Paraguay in 1978 for the commercialization of cotton and soybeans. At the time, Cargill in Paraguay was engaged in the business of gathering production, and its subsequent transformation and export to Argentina, where it is imported as Cargill-Argentina. The company's first port was built in 1991. It is located on kilometer one of the Paraná River, which allowed it to intensify its participation in the grain market in the country. In 2008, construction began on a second port (Puerto Unión), which became operational in 2011. It operates 500 meters upriver from the main water intakes of the Paraguayan Sanitation Services Company (ESSAP). Public Health warned about possible damage to the health of the population.

For its part, Monsanto has the “monopoly” of almost 100% of the transgenic soy that is grown in Paraguay; it is patented by the transnational company. Monsanto's power is so great in Paraguay that Franco, the president who came to power after Lugo, publicly defended the company during a mass celebrated by the bishop of Asunción.

Argentina, sick with agrotoxic progress

Image of Reduas

In Argentina, more than 13 million people currently live in areas that are fumigated with more than 300 million liters of agrochemicals per year, in 22 million affected hectares and the dose continues to grow, while the population falls ill and dies in an uncontrolled rain toxic. For its part, the Argentine Agrotoxic Chamber reported that in the last 22 years the consumption of pesticides increased 858%, while official epidemiological data reveal that, in that time, there were 400% more congenital malformations and 300% more oncological pathologies. A report from the Ministry of Health in May 2012 confirms that populations exposed to agrochemicals have 30 percent more cancer cases than those that are not. According to the Fumigated Town Doctors Network, after more than 15 years of systematic fumigations, the health teams of the fumigated towns detect a change in the pattern of diseases in their populations: respiratory problems are much more frequent and linked to applications, like chronic dermatitis; in the same way, epileptic patients convulse much more frequently during fumigation, depression and immune disorders are more frequent.

There are high rates of spontaneous abortions (up to 19%) and the consultations for infertility in men and women increased notably. The goat herds of peasants and natives register, in some areas, up to 100% of abortions linked to exposure to pesticides. An increase in thyroid disorders and diabetes is also detected. More and more children are born with malformations in these areas, especially if the first months of pregnancy coincide with the spraying season. Down syndromes, myelomeningoceles, congenital heart disease, etc. (among others) are frequently diagnosed in these areas.

According to biologist Raúl Montenegro, in Argentina the population exposed to fumigation does not know that they have pesticides in their bodies. They received them by direct exposure, by consuming sediment from water tanks, soil particles and contaminated food. And also transplacentally and breastfeeding when they were embryos, fetuses and small babies, since their mothers stored pesticides in blood and fatty tissue. Chemical aggression affects all people, but without a doubt, the poorest populations in the countryside, the laborers, their women and children, are the least likely to protect and recover their health.

In the case of Misiones, a border area with Parguay and Brazil, the Posadas Provincial Hospital found that even the unexposed population has at least 15 agrochemicals circulating in the blood, with the aggravation that their combined effects are not known, since it is known how glyphosate works, but not how it works when combined with the herbicide 2-4-D. What I do know is that this is one of the components of the agent orange that the Americans used in Vietnam and that there are many more patients with malformations in the area.

Even so, complaints about the effects of agrochemicals, used in the exploitation of highly profitable crops, tend to get lost in the controversy. Despite all the complaints made by the neighbors, the information collected in the Medical Meetings of the Cordoba (2010) and Rosario (2011) medical schools, and all the scientific data that demonstrate the toxicity of pesticides, the Government continues to bet on increasing agricultural production with the same model. From the business, academic and government sectors, who defend chemical agriculture, it is still insisted that there is insufficient evidence. Las grandes empresas nucleadas en CASAFE (Cámara de Sanidad Agropecuaria y Fertilizantes) niegan que estos productos sean tóxicos, si se usan de acuerdo a las instrucciones y al “uso responsable”.

En nuestro país, no existe una ley que regule el uso de agrotóxicos, existen algunas normativas provinciales cuya aplicación no resulta del todo clara.

Montenegro recalca que la escasa visibilidad de esta problemática se debe a la ausencia de registros y la falta de monitoreo de residuos de plaguicidas, lo que no se mide parece no existir, pero existe y donde el estado nacional, los gobiernos provinciales, las empresas y los productores son responsables. El SENASA sigue autorizando tóxicos sin procedimientos independientes y sus dos organismos de control de plaguicidas, SIFFAB y SICOFHOR, no controlan o lo hacen mal. No se aplica el Principio Precautorio de la Ley Nacional de Ambiente, el cual respalda la adopción de medidas protectoras ante las sospechas fundadas de que ciertos productos o tecnologías crean un riesgo grave para la salud pública o el medio ambiente; no se trata el proyecto de ley nacional que penaliza aplicar estos venenos sobre las personas, se sigue promoviendo el aumento indiscriminado de su utilización y se sigue manifestando que el glifosato es tan inocuo como “agua con sal”.

Un hito frente a esta situación fue en Córdoba. El juicio de las Madres de Barrio Ituzaingó -realizado en 2012, el cual adquirió carácter de histórico ya que fue el primero en Argentina y Latinoamérica, donde la justicia encontró culpable a un productor agropecuario y a un fumigador por contaminación con agrotóxicos- marcó un precedente que abrió una fuerte reflexión en relación a la actual labor agraria y sus más nefastas consecuencias.

Posteriormente, en diciembre del mismo año, un grupo de ciudadanos demandó a varias empresas y al Estado argentino por el uso indiscriminado de agrotóxicos, cada vez más generalizados en el país. La Corte Suprema de Justicia analiza la demanda contra las firmas Monsanto, Syngenta, DuPont, Novartis, Nidera y Bayer, entre otras productoras de OGM, así como contra el Estado Nacional y el Consejo Federal de Medio Ambiente (COFEMA). Los demandantes piden a la Corte que exhorte al Poder Ejecutivo a suspender provisionalmente el uso de OGM y agrotóxicos, hasta que se llegue a una conclusión científica sobre sus efectos para la salud y el medio ambiente. Piden además que el Congreso legisle sobre bioseguridad y condene a las firmas demandadas a reparar el ambiente y pagar las indemnizaciones oportunas. La modificación artificial del genoma de las plantas se aprobó en Argentina en 1996, y desde entonces se ha aprobado el uso de 27 semillas transgénicas, diez de ellas solo en 2013. Aún no hay novedades al respecto.

Desprotegidxs por las Leyes

En los últimos diez años, con la expansión de la frontera extractiva que exige concentración de tierras y ocupación de territorios, la criminalización se ha ampliado a las comunidades indígenas y campesinas, así como a nuevos grupos y asambleas socio-ambientales y organizaciones territoriales. En esta línea, existe una relación directa entre extractivismo, política de concentración de la tierra y deterioro de los derechos. Como consecuencia de ello, la creciente territorialización de los conflictos ha derivado tanto en el desplazamiento de comunidades originarias y campesinas como en una mayor persecución de dirigentes y militantes territoriales y ambientales, en un marco de militarización creciente y de salidas represivas.

En el 2010, se aprobó en Argentina la Ley Antiterrosita. El término “terrorista” cuenta con una larga historia en el lenguaje político, pero se ha utilizado muy especialmente a los efectos de demonizar a los opositores políticos. La sanción de leyes antiterroristas intenta producir dos efectos simultáneos: por un lado, castigar; por otro lado, intimidar, paralizar, dividir, romper lazos de solidaridad. El estrecho vínculo que existe entre la reciente reforma de la Justicia y la ya sancionada ley antiterrorista resulta evidente. La última tiene como principal objetivo mantener bajo amenaza a los militantes populares y luchadores sociales, mientras que la primera se interesa en mantener bajo amenaza a los jueces discordantes. Contradictoriamente, sus defensores sostuvieron que aprobaban la ley pero que nunca la aplicarían, cuestión absurda ya que la ley antiterrorista está en vigor y sus efectos se sienten con independencia de que un juez se decida a imponerla.

Son diversos los casos en los que las autoridades políticas o judiciales amenazaron con aplicar la ley antiterrorista. Las personas que salen a manifestar su legítimo derecho a la protesta se las sustantiva; han dejado de ser miembros de una comunidad, de un movimiento social, de un grupo comunitario: son terroristasEstos procesos de pérdida de derechos incluyen también avance y expropiación del territorio de las comunidades campesinas indígenas y de los bienes naturales. Tenemos el caso de la extradición de los presos políticos paraguayos, que llegaron a Argentina escapando de la persecución de su gobierno, y a los tres días fueron detenidos negandóseles el refugio político, este fue un precedente e inaguración de la aplicación de la ley “anti” terrorista. Los seis militantes campesinos paraguayos, pertenecientes al movimiento Patria Libre, rechazaron las acusaciones que el gobierno paraguayo les imputaba de terroristas, bajo una falsa acusación de secuestro y asesinato de la hija del ex-presidente paraguayo Cubas. Los campesino indicaron que dicho suceso fue un ajuste de cuentas entre distintos grupos mafiosos enquistados en el gobierno y denunciaron entre otras cosas más de doscientos trabajadores, campesinos y militantes asesinados en Paraguay impunemente.

Otro ejemplo, se advierten en materia de los derechos indígenas, con que el nuevo Código Civil entra en directa contradicción con lo establecido por la Constitución vigente, el Convenio 169 de la OIT y la Declaración de Naciones Unidas sobre los Derechos de los Pueblos Indígenas. El proyecto no aseguró la participación y consulta previa requeridas por la normativa vigente; incorpora el régimen de propiedad comunitaria indígena en un marco de derecho privado regido por principios que le son ajenos; otorga la titularidad del derecho sólo a las comunidades indígenas registradas como personas jurídicas, justificando así los constantes avallasamientos y violaciones a los derechos humanos de las comunidades, en pos de una frontera agropecuaria que quiere seguir expandiéndose. A lo anterior, esto hay que agregar que, en los últimos años, existe una tendencia a la tercerización de la represión a través de la utilización por ejemplo de sindicatos (la UOCRA, sobre todo), guardias blancas y sicarios contratados especialmente por latifundistas y propietarios sojeros como en el caso de Chaco, Formosa y Santiago del Estero.


Video: Part 2 l Triple Frontier l Brazil, Argentina u0026 Paraguay l Tri-border l Hindi l Urdu (June 2021).