Since the Court's judgement, the Legislative Assembly has used various means to evade the requirements of the Court and in November 1997 has given initial approval after a first reading to a draft law that does not take into account the indigenous peoples' proposals, that again violates their right to political participation and that fails to recognise the rights of the indigenous peoples who make up more than half the total population of the State.

- Expressing concern for the fact that the Legislative Assembly of the State of Amazonas has not taken into accont the indigenous peoples' proposals for the political division of the territory of the State.

- Asking that the rights of the indigenous peoples are respected in the new law for the Political Division of the Territory of the State of Amazonas in accordance with the instruction of the Supreme Court of Justice.

- Urging that the Legislative Assembly considers approving the proposals presented in the draft law for the Political Division of the Territory of the State of Amazonas made by the indigenous peoples and communities.

Send them to:
1. Dip. Humberto Raidan President y demas miembros de la Asamblea Legislative del Estado Amazonas Av. Aguerrevere, Puerto Ayacucho, Estado Amazonas, Venezuela. Telefax: + 58 48 212 455 or + 58 48 213 855

2. Sr. Bernabe Gutierrez Parra Gobernador del Estado Amazonas Av, Rio Negro, Puerto Ayacucho, Estado Amazonas, Venezuela. Fax: + 58 48 210 371

3. Dr. Alfredo Ducharme Magistrado Ponente Corte Suprema de Justicia Av. Baralt, San Jose del Avila, Caracas, Venezuela Fax: + 58 2 562 8113

1. Many of the indigenous people, particularly women and remote groups, lack identity cards and have, thereby, been disenfranchised.
2. Accusations of vote rigging and the intimidation of candidates and voters are rife.
3. Party politics has been introduced into the communities causing divisions.
4. Clientelistic relations have been established and reinforced throughout the territory.
5. Urban domination of rural communities has been reinforced.
6. Dominant communities and ethnic groups have secured their authority over smaller and politically marginal ones. In particular, 'criollos' have come to dominate indigenous peoples.
7. The provisions of generous salaries, benefits and positions of power for office holders has hastened the emergence of an indigenous elite and accelerated the trend towards individualist profit seeking.
8. Indigenous leaders who have joined the political parties to gain office as mayors have been corrupted. Currently one indigenous mayor is in hiding as he and his staff face charges of serious embezzlement and financial mismanagement.
8. The boundaries of the 'municipios' and 'parroquias' do not conform to indigenous polities or ethnic boundaries. This has led to further divisions.
9. Concern has been raised that the new mayors will authorise the redefinition of lands as 'ejidos municipales' creating further obstacles to the titling of indigenous lands.
The indigenous proposals would redefine the boundaries and administrative centres of the 'municipios' and 'parroquias' to accord more closely with indigenous realities, make voting procedures for electing leaders much more transparent, and ensure that the elected leaders were subject to much greater scrutiny and control by other community representatives. These proposals are being resisted by State politicians, most of whom are non- indigenous, as they will lessen their influence in indigenous areas and weaken their control of the electorates.