{41° 0) 9 .

2223844, 7—77 ,,

PÜR / VSA DE ACCSÓN IS PROMOTED BY REASON OF THE

CONTENT OF DECREE NUMBER 82-2004 PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL
GAZETTE OF THE REPUBLIC OF HONDURAS NUMBER 30,428 OF
JUNE 29, 2004, WHICH CONTAINS THE LAW OF PROPERTY.

HONORABLE MAGISTRATES OF THE CHAMBER OF THE

CONSTITUTIONAL REGULATION OF THE SUPREME COURT OF
JUSTICE.

I, Clarisa Vega M. of legal age, married, Lawyer and of this address,

registered in the Honduran Bar Association, with Number 1210, acting as
legal representative of THE ORGANIZACIÓN FRATENAL NEGRA
HONDURENA (OFRANEH), an organization for the defense of human
rights, of traditional culture of its people and the ancestral ownership of the
territories of the black communities of Honduras, with Legal Personality
granted by the Presidency of the Republic through Resolution No. 72 dated
June 11, 1981; With due respect, I appear before that Honorable Chamber
of the Supreme Court of Justice requesting through action and by reason of
content that the unconstitutionality and therefore the inapplicability of the
Property Law be declared in relation to the indigenous territories, contained
in the Legislative Decree Number 82-2004, for which I state the following:

I.- PLACE TO RECEIVE NOTIFICATIONS:

To receive notifications, I indicate the office of the Ferrera Law Firm, located
in Altos de la Hoya, Calle La Merced No. 1201, in the city of Tegucigalpa.

BASE ARGUMENTS AND FOUNDATIONS.- EXPLANATIONS

RELEVANT TO THE LAW THAT IS CHALLENGED.
1 .- In Honduras, there are several well-differentiated ethnic groups, among
them are Lencas, Tolupanes, Misquitos, Garífunas, Tawakas, Chortís,
Payas, Negros Creoles and others who have organized to defend their
rights, preserve their culture and traditions and protect especially their
lands. We can mention among these organizations the Black Fraternal
Organization of Honduras (OFRANE), the Honduran Advisory Council for
the Development of Native Ethnicities (CAHDEA), the Confederation of
Native Peoples of Honduras (CONPAH) among many others, since each
ethnic group has considered forming its own organizations to strengthen
themselves and from their own structures to protect and safeguard their
culture and rights.
One of the greatest challenges in recent times in Honduras is the security of
land tenure and even more so in the ethnic towns and communities, which
have been dispossessed of their territories by landowners and other power
groups that They see in the areas where these groups live a suitable and
potential benefit for the exploitation of resources, which are maintained in
better conditions than in other areas of the country.
2 .- Ethnic groups, organized or not, have been fighting a battle for the
recognition of their ancestral rights over their territories, which has not been
totally possible due to the powerful interests that oppose respecting their
right to land and its natural resources. of which they are sustained. A very
important element that ethnic groups argue is that of historical continuity.
Ethnic communities and Afro-descendant groups have taken possession of
the need to preserve, develop and transmit to their future generations their
ancestral lands and their group identity, taking this as a platform for their
continued existence as a people, in accordance with their cultural patterns. ,
their social organization and their justice systems.- Thus, historical
continuity involves the occupation of their lands, common ancestry, common
culture, language, among others.
Because indigenous and Afro-descendant peoples have a higher value
within their culture than respect for nature, they maintain a close relationship
with their environment, respect for Mother Earth and rational use of the
resources in their environment.
3 .- Considering the historical richness and the importance of the
indigenous culture for the harmonious and balanced development of the
country, the constituent legislators established in the current Constitution of
the Republic in its article 173 that the State will preserve and encourage
native cultures. The Legal Dictionary of Cabanellas Volume III page 364
defines the word “preservation” as the action or effect of preserving.-
Protection, protection, conservation, avoidance of evil or danger and
“preserve” as protecting, freeing from damage or risks.
While the concept preserve according to the Larousse dictionary means to
protect, defend or safeguard in advance from damage or danger. It also
involves safeguarding and protecting, but despite this, ethnic groups
constitute the most vulnerable, discriminated and disadvantaged social
groups in the country and have not been able to stop the wave of
dispossession of their lands, discrimination and the lack of political will! of
governments to face the crisis of these compatriots.
The situation has been visualized by international organizations, including
the United Nations (UN), and they have created the so-called United
Nations Permanent Forum on Indigenous Issues. Also, the International
Labor Organization (ILO), after investigating forced labor using ethnic
populations, approved the first international legal instrument on indigenous
peoples in 1957, which was replaced in 1989 by Convention 169 on
Indigenous and Tribal Peoples in Independent Countries. This agreement,
ratified by Honduras,
 It contains, in part II, articles 13 to 19, provisions related to the recognition of
the interested peoples' right of ownership and possession over the lands
they traditionally occupy.

The State of Honduras signed and ratified ILO Convention 169 in 1994, this
legal instrument being of great importance for the indigenous peoples of the
country, since it managed to fill the enormous gap that existed in the country
in terms of protection and defense of territories, and worldview of indigenous
peoples.
Article 14, paragraph 1) of Convention 169, which accompanies this
resource, verbatim says: The right of ownership and possession over the
lands that they traditionally occupy must be recognized. In addition, in
appropriate cases, measures must be taken to safeguard the right of the
peoples concerned to use lands that are not exclusively occupied by them,
but to which they have traditionally had access for their traditional
subsistence activities. In this regard, particular attention should be paid to
the situation of nomadic peoples and itinerant farmers.

Yo
On August 23, 2003, ten of the representative federations of the country's
indigenous peoples requested a consultation, prior to the approval of the
Law for the reduction of the i ■
Poverty through the Normalization of Property Ownership and Economic
Activities. And thus in this way comply with Article 6 of Convention 169,
which states that:
1. In applying the provisions of this Convention, governments shall:

a) Consult the interested peoples, through appropriate procedures and in

particular through their institutions

/
\ ! ::
\ representative, whenever legislative or administrative measures are foreseen that may
directly affect them.

| 2. The consultations carried out in application of this Agreement

 1

They must be carried out in good faith and in a manner appropriate to the
circumstances, with the aim of reaching agreement or obtaining consent
regarding the proposed measures.

The State of Honduras, through the Rural Areas Administration Project

(PAAR), proceeded to carry out consultation with the Garifuna People on
October 25 and 26, 2003, presenting two drafts, one of the Law for the
reduction of Poverty and the Property Law, versions that were severely
criticized and rejected by the participating leaders.

It is worth remembering how Mrs. Gregoria Flores (Coordinator of Ofraneh

at that time) was emphatic in pointing out how the draft of the Draft Law did
not reflect ILO Convention 169, endangering the traditional forms of
community possession of the occupied territories. for more than two
centuries by the Garifuna people. Some community leaders expressed their
repudiation of the document's underhanded intention to individualize
property ownership, as a ruse to proceed with the dispossession of
communities that are seen as objectives of tourism entrepreneurs.

Yo ,
For OFRANEH, the surprise was greater, when the Property Law was
published in the Gazette of the Republic on June 29, 2004, without
reflecting any of the observations that were provided by the consultation,
the final document being a threat to survival. culture of the Garifuna people
as a differentiated culture.

It should be noted that the right to consultation was denied to the other
federations, which although they requested the State of Honduras, it never
proceeded to fulfill its duty. The fact of having ignored the multiple
observations made by OFRANEH in the San Juan Tela Consultation incurs
a violation of the laws of the State of Honduras such as the Treaty of Vienna
(1969), which is explicit in its PART III, on the : Observance, application and
interpretation of treaties, in its first section Article 26. "Pacta sunt servanda."
Every treaty in force binds the parties and must be complied with by them in
good faith. Also Article 27 regarding domestic law and observance of
treaties. A party may not invoke the provisions of its domestic law as
justification for non-performance of a treaty. The State of Honduras, by
signing and ratifying ILO Convention 169, committed to adapt national laws
to the Convention.

The Right to Consultation on the aforementioned Property Law, as

indicated in Article 6 of Convention 169 of the ILO, has been violated by the
State of Honduras, to the detriment of the rights of the indigenous people of
the country, with the aggravating factor of having approved the Property
Law that repeatedly violates the Constitution of the Republic.

Yo
The above leaves no doubt about the obligation of the State to guarantee
the protection of the property and possession rights of ethnic groups,
compliance with the International Treaties on the matter and that the laws
issued do not diminish, restrict or distort , the rights and guarantees
established in the Fundamental Charter of Honduras.

IL- SIGNING OF THE LAW OR PRECEPTS WHOSE

UNCONSTITUTIONALITY IS INTENDED.
The Property Law, Legislative Decree No. 82-2004 approved by the
National Congress on May 28, 2004, was published in the Official Gazette
La Gaceta on June 29, 2004, having repealed Decree Law No. 171 of
December 30, 1974, which contained the Property Registry Law and the
National Cadastre Law, among others.
The Property Law initially contains 142 articles, some of them repealed,
reformed and others added by Decrees approved later.
Certain articles, specifically articles 73 paragraph 7, 95, 97, 99, 100 second
paragraph, 125 contradict the fundamental principles established in the
Constitution of the Republic, which motivates the present request for a
declaration of unconstitutionality and its respective inapplicability. Below is
the relevant explanation:

1 .- Article 73 of the Property Law establishes: “IT is a regularization

process, it will be initiated ex officio or at the request of a party by the
Property Institute (IP) through a National Property Regularization Program
on urban and rural lands included. within any of the following cases: ........ 7)
Those that, lacking title, are owned by ethnic groups” This provision of the
 1

Property Law is completely unconstitutional since it subjects them to a

regularization process that consists of presenting titles, hearings, hearings,
expropriation, etc. the ancestral territories of the ethnic groups, which are
protected by the State according to article 346 of the Constitution of the
Republic in force, by declaring that it is the duty of the State to dictate
measures to protect the rights of indigenous groups, especially their lands. .
The legislators who approved the Property Law, subjecting indigenous
territories to regularization processes, are homologating any property to the
areas where such communities are settled, which violates the fundamental
rights of said groups, against their historical continuity, the basis of which
Primordial is the possession of the land where they have lived for hundreds
of years, under the concept of communal property, lands that fulfill the social
function of protecting native cultures and also contrary to international
agreements, including Convention 169, the internal law of the Republic by
virtue of its approval by the National Congress.
Although it is true that the Property Law pursues the security of land tenure
for all Hondurans, in the case of indigenous groups this security must be
based on the titling of their territories where they are settled, the sanitation
of their lands, stop the invaders as well as put a stop to their illegal sale and
a control and monitoring system that effectively allows indigenous
communities to enjoy and benefit from their lands as a human right. The
sole possession of land by indigenous and Afro-descendant communities
must be the basis and foundation so that these peoples who do not have
titles to the land they inhabit can be recognized by the State and obtain the
respective registration, following the provisions of the Charter. Magna.

2 .- Article 95 of the Property Law establishes: “In the event that the State:
intends to exploit natural resources in the territories of these peoples, it must
inform them and consult them about the benefits and damages that may
arise prior to authorizing any prospecting or exploitation.- In the event that it
authorizes any type of exploitation, the people must receive equitable
compensation for any damage they suffer as a result of these activities. In
accordance with this article, the State may authorize exploitation of natural
resources on their ancestral lands, Under some conditions. The above
distorts the concept of safeguarding native cultures and the protection of
their lands and forests. HE

consider that within! principle of sustainability, indigenous communities can

carry out community development projects, use of natural resources,
tourism microenterprises, etc. that improves the current situation of poverty
and lack of access to basic services, a concept that does not admit mega
tourist projects, which destroy even the scenic beauty, mining projects that
totally change the ecosystems and harm health, or logging that They harm
water sources, they cause erosion in rivers and other water resources, since
they are effectively contradicting the spirit of the Constitution of the Republic
in which protection measures must be taken. - Allowing exploitations that
the same law provides that they can harm is unconstitutional, it additionally
attacks the survival of the indigenous population, fundamentally their culture
and food security, therefore it is contrary to the spirit of the constitutional
norm. Indigenous communities cannot put their ancestral territories and
ethnic identity at risk, they are actively trying to protect their culture and the
rights to their lands and resources, so there is no legal possibility of any type
of exploitation or the possibility of receiving compensation for damages. that
they could suffer, because what they would lose is priceless.

Yo
3 .- Article 97 of the Property Law states "The third party who has title to
property in the land of these towns and who has had and possessed the
land covered by that title, has the right to continue possessing and exploiting
it." In fact, there cannot be property titles within the indigenous territories,
since they have delimited a space and population groups within the
framework of affinity of their culture, for them nature is an ecosystem of
which the human species is a part, in a worldview perspective, which is
compatible with the concept of predominance of collective interest over
individual interest, contrary sensu, the individual interest characteristic of the
so-called “third parties” who place emphasis on the individualistic
conception, which uses resources to an immediate, short-term goal, without
considering the order and balance of nature, which is strongly proven with
outsiders who have invaded the territorial spaces of indigenous groups in
various areas of the country, causing real damage to the elements of nature
and which must be relocated, precisely to maintain the continuity of the
 1

culture and be consistent with what is established in the Constitution of the

Republic.
In fact, if there are titles, these would be void of nullity, as mentioned in
article 98 of the same law: “The third party who has received title to property
in the communal lands of these towns, which due to its characteristics could
be voidable, prior to the return. of the lands to the affected communities will
be compensated for their improvements." Undoubtedly the legislator wanted
to protect himself by establishing the previous provision, knowing that both
the National Agrarian Institute and the Municipalities have granted useful
and full titles and domains in indigenous territories, which which has even
been denounced by the injured parties before the Inter-American
Commission on Human Rights, who has issued precautionary measures
such as the one literally transcribed below: “That the State of Honduras
adopt the necessary measures to avoid or suspend the execution of any
judicial action or administrative that affects the ancestral property right of the
community of Triunfo de la Cruz, until the organs of the Inter-American
Human Rights System adopt a final decision in the case."

4 .- Article 99 of the Property Law establishes: “Third parties on the lands of

these towns without any title may negotiate their permanence with the
community by paying the rental fee they agree to.” Allow a negotiation of
 1

permanence to third parties on indigenous lands paying an agreed rental

fee, is also contradictory with the intention of the Constituents when they
established in article 346 of the Constitution that measures must be issued
to protect the rights and interests of indigenous communities, especially of
their lands and forests where they were settled; The provision of the
Property Law contained in article 99, instead of constituting a protection
measure, is creating a climate of destabilization of indigenous cultures by
pretending that today a third party, tomorrow another third party, and so on,
settle in the indigenous territories. until they lose possession of their lands
because they have rented them to third parties and they are able at a certain
moment to claim prescription and seize them .
It is worth mentioning that those who aspire to take over the lands of ethnic
groups and the third parties who are currently holding those lands carry out
all kinds of persecutions against members of indigenous communities,
harassment, death threats, discrimination, and even crimes against them.
they. Therefore, the content of article 99 of the Property Law, instead of
being a measure that contributes to the fulfillment of constitutional
guarantees in favor of indigenous and Afro-descendant peoples, is
diminishing and making more complex the claim of the groups' ancestral
territories. ethnic.

5 .- ES Article 100 second paragraph of the Property Law provides:

“However, the same communities may put an end to this communal regime,
authorize leases in favor of third parties or authorize contracts of another
nature that allow the participation of the community in investments that
contribute to its development."
With the previous provision, an attempt is being made to end one of the
foundations of the very existence of indigenous groups and that is the
system of traditional collective land ownership and its connection with
cultural aspects, its language, its music, its dance, its food culture, its justice
system, etc. and also with what the earth provides them for their survival.
End! Communal or collective land regime means putting an end to
indigenous cultures in Honduras once and for all. Many indigenous groups
live from agriculture, hunting, fishing, gathering, and raising domestic
animals on land that belongs to their functional habitat; According to their
culture and traditions, they cultivate the land communally, some using the
fallow technique, by which the land is left to rest for up to five years, also
using other traditional forms of cultivation that protect the soil and
biodiversity. Trying to fragment or segment indigenous lands only pursues
access by powerful interests to the areas that have been occupied, owned
and preserved by indigenous groups for centuries, where they have their
sacred places, and where their ancestors were born, grew up and died, who
They have transmitted ancestral knowledge to them.

6 .- Article 125 of the Property Law, first paragraph, 4

stipulates: In the unregistered areas of the indigenous and Afro-Honduran
peoples, the National Agrarian Institute (NA) will be in charge of executing
the reguarization processes in their favor using the mechanisms established
in this Law. The legislators who approved the Property Law in a manner
without consultation and totally violating the Constitution of the Republic
expressly confirm and ratify that the lands of indigenous communities must
be subject to reguarization processes in their favor through the National
Agrarian Institute, using the mechanisms established in said law. If it is in
their favor that the objective is to enter into a tedious and complicated
reguarization process, if it is fully established in the Constitution that the
lands where the indigenous groups are settled enjoy protection and that the
State will preserve the native cultures, Article - 346 constitutional -, it is
enough to know that indigenous populations occupy a certain territory for it
to be recognized by the State and to be registered in the Real Estate
Registry. What really does the Property Law pursue by surreptitiously
addressing this issue and subliminally trying to hide the true objective, which
is to penetrate indigenous lands and strip them of their resources and
ultimately end their cultural patterns, beliefs and traditions.
As you can appreciate, Honorable Magistrates of the Constitutional
Chamber who have been entrusted with the honorable function of Control of
the Constitution of the Republic, with the aforementioned provisions of the
Property Law, the letter and spirit of our legacy Magna Carta are being
violated. for our ancestors who knew how to fairly appreciate the values,
wisdom and culture of our people, whom we can still save from
extermination.
 Yo

iii.- Reasons that serve as basis for the claim.

The Constitutional Guarantees flagrantly and repeatedly violated by the
Property Law are contained in articles 64, 172, 173, and 346 of the
Constitution of the Republic through the approval i
of the Property Law in its articles, 73 paragraph 7, 95, 125, 97, 99, 100
second paragraph and 125., which has been explained in this resource,
however it transcribes what is established in the Constitution of the Republic
:
Article 64.- Laws and governmental provisions or any other order that
regulate the exercise of the declarations, rights and guarantees established
in this Constitution will not be applied if they diminish, restrict or distort them.
This article is self-explanatory, provisions that in any way violate the
guarantees established in the Constitution are void and inapplicable.
Article 172.- All anthropological, historical and artistic wealth of Honduras is
part of the cultural heritage of the nation.
Therefore, the culture of indigenous groups is part of the cultural heritage of
Honduras and its preservation is of interest to the entire nation.
Article 173.- The State will preserve and encourage native cultures, as well
as genuine expressions of national folklore, popular art and crafts.
The expressions of national folklore, popular art and crafts come directly
from indigenous cultures, which are attempted to disappear with a Property
Law that establishes provisions that, instead of preserving them, seek to
cause harm to these peoples, atomize them and attack their culture and
traditions.
Article 346.- It is the duty of the State to dictate measures to protect the
rights and interests of the indigenous communities existing in the country,
especially the lands and forests where they are settled.
This constitutional provision is not content with expressly defining a duty to
the State in relation to indigenous groups, but rather describes and
individualizes that, specifically, its duty is with reference to the lands and
forests where they are settled.

V.- Explanation of the Direct, Personal and Legitimate interest of the actors
that motivates the Unconstitutionality Action.
Direct Interest:
The direct interest of the indigenous peoples in this Resource and especially
the Honduran Black Fraternal Organization, emanates precisely from the
character of a higher-ranking norm held by the Constitution of the Republic,
Fundamental Law, Supreme Law of the Nation from which the validity of the
secondary norms that are in accordance with the constitutional principles and
the aspirations and supreme values of human beings embodied in it. The
highest legal instrument of the nation cannot be transgressed by laws such
as the Property Law, which, as has been sufficiently explained, not only
violates the constitutional norms regarding the fundamental human right to
the land and the natural resources it contains, but also against International
Conventions such as ILO 169 and the Rio Declaration on Environment and
Development, which in its Principle 22 states: “Indigenous populations and
their communities, as well as other local communities, play a fundamental
role in environmental management.” and in development, due to their
traditional knowledge and practices. States should duly recognize and
support their identity, culture and interests and enable their effective
participation in achieving sustainable development."
The jurisdictional body represented by the Honorable Constitutional
Chamber of the Supreme Court of Justice that is responsible for
Constitutional Control with his sentence declaring the
unconstitutionality of the Property Law in articles 2
pertinent measures will avoid further damage, preventing the continued
dispossession of their lands, the illegitimate sale of lands that they belong to .
Yo .
to ethnic communities, invasions by third parties, jeopardizing the future
territorial survival of indigenous and Afro-descendant peoples, whose
protection corresponds to the State, which must guarantee respect for said
cultures, especially their lands.

Personal interest.-
In the Unconstitutional Action that is promoted against the General Mining
Law, there is a personal interest of each of the indigenous peoples and of
each of their members and all of them as a whole, as well as of the entire
Honduran population as people those in which the constitutional guarantees
described above have been violated and that are born or emanate from the
fact of being people and not things. Consistent with the above, the
Constitution of the Republic itself in its article 59 describes its humanistic
vocation by saying that the human person is the supreme end of Society, and
of the State. Everyone has the obligation to respect and protect it. The dignity
of the human being is inviolable.
The transgression of the constitutional norm made by the Property Law in
relation to the personal and collective interests of the indigenous and Afro-
descendant peoples has motivated the Honduran Black Fraternal
Organization and all those who make it up, which has legal capacity to appear
in trial, with rights and obligations.
Legitimate Interest.- •
The legitimate interest is manifested and emanates from the condition of
being the direct aggrieved actors by the approval of the Property Law issued
in contradiction to the precepts of the Constitution of the Republic, and based
on which, the indigenous peoples are being stripped of their lands as
established in a Law that has the obligation to ensure the security of the land
of all Hondurans, especially the groups that have owned their living areas for
centuries and that nevertheless had been carried out illicitly with the Law of
Property is being legalized such a situation to the detriment of all ethnic
communities.

6.- Explanation of the concept that motivates the Unconstitutionality Action.

The Unconstitutionality of the Property Law arbitrarily and illegally damages
the individual and collective constitutional rights of the communities where the
indigenous and Afro-descendant groups are settled, such as subjecting the
titling to a regularization process that does not apply to these peoples since
The Constitution of the Republic subjects them to a protection regime of
preservation and safeguarding, in addition to allowing third parties to continue
settling in those areas and for them, even though they illegally hold the
indigenous territories, to reach lease agreements, etc. And what is more
opprobrious is that ethnic groups break with their fundamental principle of
maintaining the communal land tenure regime, the platform of their historical
continuity as peoples.

Additionally, not only the ethnic communities are affected, but also the
Honduran population in general, the State of Honduras and future
generations of Hondurans as the General Environmental Law in its article 71
establishes: “Native ethnic groups will have special support from the State in
relation to with their traditional systems of comprehensive use of renewable
natural resources, which must be studied in order to establish their viability
as a model of sustainable development. - The future development of these
groups must incorporate the already existing standards and criteria of
sustainable development.

Constitutional article 315 provides, based on the recognition of the

supremacy of the Constitution over any other law, that in case of
incompatibility between a constitutional norm and an ordinary legal norm, the
former will be applied, an issue that must be taken from the perspective of
the principle of legality. or legality applied to the concept of the inapplicability
of unconstitutional law and the direct application of constitutional provisions.

The manifest collision between the Constitution and the Property Law that
motivates this action is detailed graphically below.
 Constitutional Provisions Provisions of the Property Law
(What is relevant) (What is relevant)

Article 346.- It is the duty of the State Article 73 “The regularization process
to dictate measures to protect the will be initiated ex officio or at the
rights and interests of the indigenous request of a party by the Property
communities existing in the country, Institute (IP) through a National
especially the lands and forests Property Regularization Program on
where they are settled. urban and rural lands included in any
Article 64.- Laws and governmental of the following cases: ................. 7)
provisions or any other order that “Those who, lacking title, are owned
regulate the exercise of the by ethnic group”
declarations, rights and guarantees
established in this Constitution will
not be applied if they diminish,
restrict or distort them. -------------------------<—
Article 346.- It is the duty of the State -------------------------
Article 95.- “In the event that the
to dictate measures to protect the
State intends to exploit natural
rights and interests of the indigenous
resources in the territories of these
communities existing in the country,
peoples, it must inform them and
especially the lands and forests
consult them about the benefits and
where they are settled.
harms that may arise prior to
Article 64.- Laws and governmental
authorizing any prospecting or
provisions or any other order that
exploitation.-
regulate the exercise of declarations,
If any type of exploitation is
rights and/or rights will not be
authorized, the towns must receive
applied.
equitable compensation for
guarantees established in this country, especially the lands and
Constitution, if they diminish, restrict, forests where they are settled.
or distort them.
Article 346.- It is the duty of the State Article 346.- It is the duty of the State
to dictate measures to protect the to dictate measures to protect the
rights and interests of the existing rights and interests of the indigenous
indigenous communities in the communities existing in the country,
especially the lands and forests Article 100' second paragraph of the
where they are settled. Property Law provides: “However,
the same communities may put an
Article 64.- Laws and governmental end to this communal regime,
provisions or any other order that authorize leases in favor of third
regulate the exercise of the parties or authorize contracts of
declarations, rights and guarantees another nature that allow the
established in this Constitution will participation of the community in
not be applied if they diminish, investments that contribute to its
restrict or distort them. development.”
Article 173.- The State will preserve
and encourage native cultures, as
well as genuine expressions of
national folklore, popular art and
crafts.

any harm they suffered as a result of

those activities.”
Article 97.- “The third party that. has
property title to the land of these
towns and who has had and
possessed the land covered by that
title, has the right to continue
possessing and exploiting it.”

Article 99.- “Third parties on the

lands of these towns without any title
may negotiate their permanence with
the community by paying the rental
fee they agree upon”
Article 172.- All anthropological,
historical and artistic wealth of
Honduras is part of the cultural
heritage of the nation

Article 346.- It is the duty of the State

to dictate measures to protect the
rights and interests of the indigenous Article 125.- First paragraph,

communities existing in the country, stipulates: In the unregistered areas

especially the lands and forests of indigenous and Afro-Honduran
where they are settled. peoples, the National Agrarian
Institute (INA) will be in charge of
executing the regularization
processes in favor of them using the
established mechanisms. in this Law.

It can clearly be observed in the articles of the Property Law, the violation of
the constitutional provisions contained in articles: 64, 172, 173, and 346.
Honorable Magistrates of the Constitutional Chamber of the Supreme Court
of Justice, based on the Constitution of the Republic and the Law of
Constitutional Justice, we very respectfully state:
1 .- As is your illustrious knowledge, the fundamental principle of
Constitutional Control is precisely the primacy of the Constitutional Norm
over any secondary norm, and that the constitutional hierarchy assumes
that every law that is issued and every legal system of the State of
Honduras, It has one of its expressions in the prohibition of issuing inferior
regulations that violate those of constitutional rank, as is the case of the
Property Law.
2 .- In the case of International Agreements, strict application must be given
to the obligations contracted by virtue of what the Constitution of the
Republic in Chapter III regarding Treaties regulates.
 specifically on the matter, and must follow the legal procedures in cases of approval of treaties.- Likewise,
international treaties, once they come into force, form part of domestic law.- Article 15 of the Constitution,
first paragraph, stipulates: Honduras endorses the principles and practices of international law that promote
human solidarity, respect for the self-determination of peoples, non-intervention and the strengthening of
peace and universal democracy.

PETITION

For all of the above, I ask the Honorable Judges of the Constitutional Chamber of the Supreme Court of
Justice to admit the present unconstitutionality action with the accompanying documents, which are: 1.-
Testimony of Public Deed Number 1380 authorized by the Notary Nectaly Montoya Reyes, in the city of La
Ceiba on December 10, 2008 and which contains the Power of Attorney with which I act.- 2.- Copy of the
Legal Personality of the Honduran Black Fraternal Organization duly authenticated 3.-Comprehensive
Certification of the Definitive title of property in full ownership in favor of the Garífuna Community of Miami,
which constitutes the inalienable heritage of the beneficiary community and where the transfers are
recorded, mostly from the year 2007, which have been registered in the Property Institute, Registry of the
Real Estate and Commercial Property of the Judicial Section of Tela, Department of Atlántida with which the
division of the communal land of the Garífuna group is accredited. 4.- Copy of the Rio Declaration on
Environment and Development, 5.- Copies of Property Laws and Agreement No. 169 About Indigenous and
Tribal Peoples in Independent Countries; give it the corresponding legal procedure and at the end you issue
a final sentence declaring the unconstitutionality due to the content of the Property Law

.4■u

L, . -

contained in Decree No. 82-2004 and published in the Official Gazette La Gaceta on June 29, 2004 for being
harmful and violative of the fundamental rights of the ethnic groups of our country and to whom the
Constitution guarantees the ancestral right over their territories that already occupy their natural resources. ,
right to justice, to respectful treatment of their condition as groups that are different due to their traditional
culture, spiritual guardians of Mother Earth, custodians of life in all its manifestations.
Tegucigalpa December 15, 2008.
DEMONSTRATION,- SUMMARY OF THE JUDGMENT GIVEN IN THE STATE OF BEL ICE ON THE LAND RIGHT OF VI LLAS MAYAS IS
PRESENTED.- JOURNALIST NOTE IS PRESENTED ON THE DEMAND FOR PtTsUS LANDS BY 31 TRIBES OF THE DEPARTMENT OF
YORO.

Honorable Judges of the Constitutional Chamber of the Supreme Court of Justice.

I, Clarisa Vega M. of generals known in File No. 649 containing the Unconstitutional Action promoted by me in favor of THE INDIGENOUS
PEOPLE OF HONDURAS through the Honduran Black Fraternal Organization (OFRANEH) against the Property Law, Legislative Decree No. 82-
2004 published in the Official Gazette La Gaceta on June 29, 2004, action based on the Constitution of the Republic, the Constitutional Justice
Law, and other current laws related to the aforementioned unconstitutionality, with due respect I appear before you at manifest and present the
following:

1 .- The evolution of society brings about the evolution and innovation of sciences, including the science of law.- This has been showing a
progressive interest in the predominant role that judicial decisions issued both nationally and internationally have in the resolution of future cases,
recognizing their legal relevance in order to illustrate specific cases.

Some authors only attribute the role of guides to maintain legal certainty and uniformity in the application of! law, others establish that judicial
precedents must be taken as integrating instruments of the legal framework.

In any sense, the ruling of the Supreme Court of Belize on the land rights of the Mayan peoples contains notable aspects in relation to the rights
that with the Appeal of Unconstitutionality we wish to make prevail before that Honorable Chamber, whose translated summary we present .

2 .- In order to provide more elements on the case of how foreign agents are holding and wish to take over indigenous territories, without the
Property Law being a legal basis to prevent such abuses against groups that constantly demand respect for the Constitution of the Republic, we
present page No. 24 dated May 19, 2009 from Diario La Prensa, about the protest of 31 tribes from the Department of Yoro.

I base this Manifestation on Article 80 and other relevant articles of the Constitution of the Republic, on the Law of Constitutional Justice, the
General Law of the Environment and other related laws that were widely related in the document in which the action is promoted.
PETITION
For the above reasons, I ask the Honorable Constitutional Chamber to: Admit this Manifestation with the accompanying documents for the
consequent purposes.

Tegucigalpa MiDC, May 21, 2009

 “DEMONSTRATION.- DIGITALIZED INFORMATION IS PRESENTED

Honorable Judges of the Constitutional Chamber

I, Clarisa Vega Molina, Attorney, of generals known in the APPEAL FOR UNCONSTITUTIONALITY by way of
action filed in favor of the indigenous peoples on the Property Law with due respect, appear before you Honorable
members of the Constitutional Chamber to express and present the following:
1 .- There are several precedents of Sentences of the Inter-American Court of Human Rights for violations of
Y indigenous territories, including that of Awas Tingui in the Republic of Nicaragua, Saramaka in the Republic of
o
Y Suriname and others that indicate the need to respect indigenous territories. for the primordial fact of safeguarding the
o
Y continuity of their native cultures.
o
2 .- We have obtained part of the ruling from the Internet, specifically regarding the lands of the Saramaka versus
Suriname case issued by the aforementioned Court, which is very illustrative for the case that we have presented
before that Honorable Chamber.
For the above reasons, I very respectfully request to accept this document with the digitalized copy of the partial
Judgment for the consequent purposes.

Tegucigalpa May 12, 2009

 DEMONSTRATION DOCUMENT IS PRESENTED,-

Honorable Supreme Court of Justice Constitutional Chamber.

I, CLARISA VEGA MOLINA, Attorney, referring to the UNCONSTITUTIONAL APPEAL! DAD, by

way of action, filed in favor of the indigenous peoples of Honduras through the Honduran Black

Fraternal Organization (OFRANE), to partially declare, on substantive grounds, the

Unconstitutionality and therefore the Inapplicability of Decree NP 82.2004, issued by the National

Congress of the Republic of Honduras on May 28, two thousand four and published in the Official

Gazette La Gaceta No. 30,428 dated June 29, two thousand four, before you. With all due respect, I

appear to present the following:

Through this writing, I present the document called: LEGAL OPINION

ON THE COMPATIBILITY OF THE PROPERTY LAW OF HONDURAS, IN I

RELATIONSHIP WITH INTERNATIONAL HUMAN RIGHTS TREATIES, prepared by the consultant

Víctor Rodríguez Rescia, for the INTERNATIONAL LABOR ORGANIZATION (ILO) SUBREGIONAL

OFFICE FOR CE NT ROAM ERICA, HAIT, PANAMA AND DOCIMINANA REPUBLIC, in October of

two thousand five.

This document provides a fairly extensive analysis of the articles of the Law.

of Property that collide and therefore violate ILO Convention 169; International caiven signed by

Honduras and that in accordance with article 16 and 18 of the Constitution of the Republic, is part of

the Internal Law, with priority to the Property Law.

Given the importance of this document, it is appropriate that it be known and taken into account by

the High Court prior to issuing the corresponding final ruling.

Hair for all the above: Consider this demonstration presented with the
 accompanied document, have it added to your record and, in a timely manner,

issue a final sentence.

Tegucigalpa MDO, May 4, 2009.