10. They indicated in more detail that the administrative process started in 1989, under Decree No. 94.945 of 1987, and that at the stage of identification and delimitation, the Technical Group of the National Indigenous Foundation (Fundação Nacional do Índio, hereinafter "FUNAI") issued an Identification Report on September 6, 1989, which states that the Xucuru were entitled to an area of 26,980 hectares. The petitioners add that, after the adoption of Decree No. 22 of 1991, the Minister of Justice issued ministerial decision No. 259 on May 29, 1992, confirming the demarcation of the territory. By that date, according to the petitioners, the majority (approximately 70%) of the Xucuru indigenous territory was occupied by nonindigenous people, however, the removal of such persons was not executed, in defiance of existing rules. The petitioners note that the demarcation process did not progress from 1992 to 1995 4 as a result of various administrative measures, and even retrograded during that period. They added that during the process the FUNAI repeated the identification and delimitation of the Xucuru indigenous territory, which, they indicated, was completed in 1995 identifying an area of 27.055,0583 hectares. 5 11. According to the petitioners, on January 8, 1996 the Executive Branch issued a new decree (Decree No. 1.775 of 1996) which introduced significant changes in the process of demarcation of indigenous lands, specifically giving third parties interested on the indigenous lands the right to challenge the identification and delimitation report. The petitioners point out that non-indigenous people - including the Pesqueira mayoralty and the Municipal Council - filed 272 challenges (contestações) against the demarcation, all of which were deemed inadmissible by the Minister of Justice through administrative decision No. 32 of July 10, 1996. Subsequently, the non-indigenous filed a motion for an injunction (mandado de segurança No. 4802-DF) to the High Court of Justice (hereinafter "STJ"). According to the petitioners, on May 28, 1997 the STJ decided in favor of the non-indigenous, which opened the way for new challenges. Such challenges, according to the petitioners, were all rejected by the Minister of Justice, and thus reaffirmed the need to implement the demarcation in the terms of the ministerial decision of 19926. However, the petitioners point out that at this time the removal of non-indigenous from the Xukuru indigenous land was also not executed. 12. According to the petitioners, the Presidential Decree that ratified the demarcation of the Xucuru indigenous territory was not issued until April 30, 2001, that is, 12 years after the start of the demarcation process. Despite this ratification, the petitioners say that the removal of non-indigenous did not take place. The petitioners emphasize that the next step established in the legislation, that is, the registration of the indigenous land within thirty days, was not carried out either because the Property Registry Official of the city of Pesqueira refused to register the land title and furthermore, filed an objection motion (Ação de suscitação de dúvidas) No. 2002.83.00.012334-9 before the local judge, challenging the validity of the demarcation process and the competence of the FUNAI to require such registration 7. 13. The petitioners underscore that this legal action was baseless, and that it was filed with the mere purpose of further delaying the demarcation process, since Article 6 of Decree No. 1,775 precisely established that after the presidential ratification, FUNAI should promote the registration of the respective indigenous territory. The petitioners point out that the legal challenge presented by that public official effectively delayed the demarcation process for four years. 14. Notwithstanding the respective registration of the Xucuru indigenous territory in 2005, the petitioners continue to argue that the Xucuru indigenous people do not enjoy yet their collective property, for non-indigenous people, who have still not been compensated by the State, remain in their territory. They also note that the final decision on two legal actions filed by non-indigenous challenging the demarcation process, are still pending: a motion to regain possession (Ação de reintegração de posse No. 92.0002697-4) and a court suit to annul the administrative demarcation process (Acción judicial para anulación del proceso administrativo de demarcación No. 2002.83.00.019349-2). As a matter of context, the petitioners referred to a series of assassinations of its leaders throughout the process. According to the petitioners, José Everaldo Rodrigues Bispo, spiritual son of the village chief, was killed on September 4, 1992. 5 According to the petitioners, Geraldo Rolim, FUNAI representative and active defender of the Indians, was killed on May 14, 1995. 6 According to the petitioners, the village chief, Cacique Xicão was killed on May 21, 1998. 7 According to the petitioners, another indigenous leader Francisco Assis Santana ("Chico Quelé"), head of the village "Pé de Serra do Oiti", he was killed on August 23, 2001. 4 3