A desocupação humanizada de propriedades rurais em Mato Grosso

Abstract

This dissertation analyzes the impact of Arguição de Descumprimento de Preceito Fundamental (ADPF) No. 828 and Law No. 14,216/2021 on the reduction of violence and the protection of human rights in agrarian conflicts involving rural properties in the State of Mato Grosso, Brazil. The study investigates whether the implementation of the principles of humanized eviction (desocupação humanizada) has produced tangible effects in mitigating lethality during repossession proceedings (reintegração de posse), in light of the historical context of extreme land concentration and structural violence that characterizes the state—an epicenter of Brazilian agribusiness. The research adopts a juridical-dogmatic approach with empirical elements, combining doctrinal analysis, examination of legislation and case law, interpretation of data produced by the Pastoral Land Commission (Comissão Pastoral da Terra—CPT), and a review of 64 judicial proceedings adjudicated before the Court of Justice of Mato Grosso (TJMT) between 2022 and 2024, complemented by a qualitative assessment of four paradigmatic cases. The first chapter historically contextualizes agrarian conflicts in Brazil and in Mato Grosso, demonstrating that rural violence stems from structural political choices, including the colonization of the Amazon, tax incentives, and institutionalized land grabbing (grilagem). CPT data indicate that Mato Grosso recorded 121 agrarian conflicts in 2024, ranking fifth within the Legal Amazon, alongside a marked reduction in killings—from nine in 2017 to zero in 2023 and 2024. The second chapter examines the legal regime of the ADPF as an instrument of concentrated constitutional review, the guidelines established by ADPF 828—such as prior judicial inspection, mediation, assessment of the social function of property, and humanized operational plans—as well as Law No. 14,216/2021, which has been consolidated as a permanent framework by CNJ Resolution No. 510/2023. The third chapter shows that 75% of the proceedings analyzed included prior inspection, and 41% were referred to the Judicial Center for Conflict Resolution and Citizenship (CEJUSC) for conciliation. Nonetheless, structural obstacles persist, including delays within INCRA, the lack of housing alternatives, and legislative resistance at the state level. The dissertation concludes that these normative innovations have reduced lethality and humanized procedures, yet they require structural policies of agrarian reform and land tenure regularization to secure lasting outcomes in democratizing access to land. In addition, it recommends strengthening the institutional capacity of Land Dispute Resolution Commissions, fostering effective interinstitutional coordination, and implementing housing policies, with a view to consolidating humanized eviction as a permanent practice.