Sustainable Tourism Law

LEGAL PROTECTION OF SUSTAINABLE TOURISM IN BRAZIL 421 Considering the aforementioned, it seems to us that the protection of the tourism heritage objectified by Act 6,513 / 1977, in order to develop the sector in a non-predatory manner, succumbs to the merely preservationist spirit that flows from its provisions. It ends up overlapping other existing legal instruments with the same purpose and ineffectiveness, which becomes more evident in the penalties chapter. In addition to criminal or those applicable by other agencies, they are listed in art. 24, as follows: I – fine of value equivalent or up to Cr$ 782,739.15; II – prohibition of activity or use; III – embargo of work; IV – obligation to repair the damage it has caused, restore what has been damaged, rebuild what has changed or disfigured; V – building demolition or removal of object that interferes with the surroundings protection and adaptation”. Art. 24 is not clear about whether penalties are only allowed if there is a prior declaration of a Special Area or Location of Tourist Interest or also due to noncompliance with notifications at the beginning of the surveys. As these are preparatory acts of the former, we understand that their noncompliance subjects the violators to the same penalties, provided that within the legal term the declaration is carried out. If the penalty is applied and subsequently, for any legal reasons, the effects of the notification cease, it is up to the Estate, in our opinion, to make up for the losses and damages which it has originated. Art. 29 sets forth a mechanism that guarantees the knowledge and consequent performance of the obligation to watch over the conservation of the asset, in case of real estate alienation, Art. 31 provides expropriation by social interest of areas, locations or assets for the development of tourist activities, and art. 32 attributes to Embratur its promotion and that of administrative simplification, without making its hypotheses explicit. They seem to be instruments alien to the objective of use adequacy, so much that the Exposition of Reasons does not mention them. It is worth mentioning the complementary competence attributed to states, metropolitan regions and municipalities to establish Special Areas of Tourist