A/HRC/30/54 account the views of indigenous peoples, to review the mandates of its existing mechanisms, in particular the Expert Mechanism on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples… with a view to modifying and improving the Expert Mechanism so that it can more effectively promote respect for the Declaration, including by better assisting Member States to monitor, evaluate and improve the achievement of the ends of the Declaration.” 118. Australia noted that the Expert Mechanism could assist States by sharing examples of successful measures taken by other Member States. Paraguay suggested that the Expert Mechanism work with States to develop guidelines and performance indicators to guide and improve monitoring to achieve the aims of the Declaration. The suggestion for development of indicators was echoed by Guatemala. Guatemala also suggested that the Expert Mechanism conduct regional studies considering the particularities of the various regions, including political and cultural differences. Guatemala also suggested that the Expert Mechanism work with States to strengthen national institutions that were mandated to develop the rights of indigenous peoples. Peru echoed calls for developing standardized monitoring indicators and indicated that the Expert Mechanism could be a platform for exchanging information and best practices among States. 119. The Saami Parliament of Finland responded that the implementation of commitments under the Declaration should be monitored on a regular basis, adding that such monitoring should be State-specific and that indigenous peoples living in the State in question should be heard. The Saami Parliament of Finland also suggested that recommendations should be issued to States for more effective implementation of the Declaration. 120. Teemashane Community Development Trust suggested that the Expert Mechanism could assist States in aligning domestic legislation to the Declaration. III. Concluding comments 121. The Expert Mechanism on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples very much appreciates the responses of States and of indigenous peoples and indigenous peoples’ organizations to its questionnaire. The responses received allow the Expert Mechanism to evaluate some of the advances and challenges in the implementation of the Declaration from the perspectives of both States and indigenous peoples. However, the Expert Mechanism regrets the relatively low number of responses received and the fact that many Sates with indigenous peoples did not submit any information on their laws, policies and practices related to the implementation of the Declaration. 122. The majority of responses received from States provide information at a very general level. While information was provided on laws, policies and programmes relating to indigenous peoples, there was almost no information indicating the effectiveness of the measures taken. Most States provided only positive answers to questions. Negative answers would also provide a greater understanding of the barriers faced by States when implementing the Declaration. 123. Although several States reported on sectoral initiatives to implement provisions of the Declaration in areas such as education, health and environmental policy, very few reported on strategies or national action plans for the full implementation of the Declaration. There was also a lack of information as to any plans to develop such strategies or action plans, despite the commitment made by the Member States in the outcome document of the World Conference on Indigenous Peoples. Given the interdependence and interrelatedness of the rights contained in the Declaration, its implementation requires comprehensive approaches and actions, as highlighted in the outcome document of the World Conference on Indigenous Peoples. Furthermore, in 16