Attachments
Indigenous peoples in isolation and initial contact comprise communities who do not maintain regular contact with majority populations and tend to avoid all forms of contact with individuals outside their group.
There are seven countries in South America where indigenous peoples are believed to be living in isolation.
Within the Amazon region, isolated indigenous communities live in Bolivia, Brazil, Colombia, Ecuador, Peru and Venezuela. In the Gran Chaco region, there is evidence of isolated indigenous peoples in Paraguay and Bolivia.
In an effort to create nationwide and international awareness around indigenous peoples in isolation and initial contact, and to help advocate for their rights, several frameworks have emerged in the last two decades for the identification, verification and protection of isolated indigenous peoples.
The terms used to refer to isolated indigenous communities vary from country to country. A common practice in national contexts is to use acronyms to refer to indigenous peoples in isolation, hence the terms PIACI (Pueblos Indígenas en Aislamiento y Contacto Inicial, ‘Indigenous Peoples in Isolation and Initial Contact’), used in Peru, and PIAV (Pueblos Indígenas en Aislamiento Voluntario, ‘Indigenous Peoples in Voluntary Isolation’), used in Bolivia and Ecuador. In Portuguese-speaking South America, isolated or recently contacted indigenous communities are known by the acronyms PIIRC (Povos Indígenas Isolados e de Recente Contato, ‘Isolated and Recently Contacted Indigenous Peoples’), which is the official term used in Brazil by the Fundação Nacional dos Povos Indígenas (FUNAI, ‘National Foundation of Indigenous Peoples’). None of these abbreviations are used by the communities themselves as markers of selfidentification.
Despite these official categorizations of ‘isolated indigenous peoples’, there is a significant discrepancy between countries and more widely as to what isolation means in any given context. Thus, the above mentioned abbreviations are used to describe a range of indigenous communities, from small groups that have survived successive massacres and thus avoid all external contact, to demographically significant peoples who engage in intermittent interactions with their neighbours. These interactions may occur through warnings to prevent encroachment, raids, traces left intentionally and other forms of engagement.
Used largely in political, legal and academic contexts, the category of ‘Indigenous Peoples in Isolation or Initial Contact’ is quite often employed in relation to communities that have achieved a state of social and economic self-sufficiency. Autonomy allows isolated indigenous communities to fulfil their social, material and spiritual needs, while avoiding social interactions that may lead to inter-ethnic tensions or conflict.
Isolation may well be due to external forces and past experiences, such as the severe exploitation indigenous peoples faced during the rubber boom, decimation due to diseases brought by outsiders, and violent attacks by miners, loggers and drug traffickers. In other words, the isolation may be called ‘voluntary’ but be far from that in reality.
The practice of isolation among some indigenous peoples has brought about numerous legal and policy challenges, namely, the difficulty faced by authorities and relevant human rights actors when seeking to prove the existence of such communities and officially recognize them as holders of rights.
It is precisely due to the political and legal invisibility of isolated indigenous peoples that states must adopt specific policies and laws to include the demands and needs of indigenous communities categorized as ‘isolated’ or ‘recently contacted’.
At the international level, various agreements, treaties and declarations aim to protect the rights of indigenous peoples. To date, ILO’s Indigenous and Tribal Peoples Convention No. 169 (1989) remains the most advanced international treaty protecting the rights of indigenous peoples. Its provisions establish minimum standards for their protection for ratifying countries, ensuring equal treatment between indigenous peoples and non-indigenous members of society. The Convention does not differentiate between indigenous peoples; rather, it is intended to apply to all indigenous peoples. While ILO 169 has only been ratified by 24 states (as of August 2025), it is significant that all states covered by this briefing have done so.
Among the various international human rights bodies, the Inter-American Commission of Human Rights (IACHR) and the Inter-American Court of Human Rights (IACtHR) play a crucial role in developing standards as well as protection mechanisms for isolated and recently contacted indigenous peoples. Both bodies, particularly the Inter-American Commission, have been active in protecting, recognizing and adopting legal guarantees for the rights of such communities.
In September 2020, the IACHR filed the first ever case with the IACtHR relating to indigenous peoples in isolation, concerning the Tagaeri and Taromenane peoples of the Amazon region in Ecuador. The IACtHR issued its ruling in March 2025. It decided against Ecuador and concluded that the government had failed in its obligation to protect these communities and uphold the principle of no contact (see Ecuador section for more details).
This historic decision has prompted Minority Rights Group (MRG) to compile this briefing to promote greater awareness of the issues facing isolated and recently contacted indigenous peoples. The following text presents an overview of the different communities, their histories and situations in Bolivia, Brazil, Ecuador, Paraguay, Peru,
Suriname and Venezuela. Country entries are separately available on MRG’s online World Directory of Minorities and Indigenous Peoples.