Equally relevant is Article 7, demanding that states should ensure that studies are carried out, in cooperation with the peoples concerned, to assess the social, spiritual, cultural and environmental impact of planned development activities on them. It then goes on to say that the results of these studies ‘shall be considered as fundamental criteria for the implementation of these activities’. Furthermore, it is worth stressing that pursuant to Article 7, paragraph 1, indigenous peoples have the right to decide their own priorities for the process of development and they shall participate in the formulation, implementation and evaluation of plans and programmes for national and regional development which may affect them directly. The implications of this provision vis-à-vis Article 15 have been pointed out by the CEACR in its general observation on the Convention of 2008. In that regard, the following passage is worth quoting: ‘The Committee cannot over-emphasize the importance of ensuring the right of indigenous and tribal peoples to decide their development priorities through meaningful and effective consultation and participation of these peoples at all stages of the development process, and particularly when development models and priorities are discussed and decided. Disregard for such consultation and participation has serious repercussions for the implementation and success of specific development programmes and projects, as they are unlikely to reflect the aspirations and needs of indigenous and tribal peoples. Even where there is some degree of general participation at the national level, and ad hoc consultation on certain measures, this may not be sufficient to meet the Convention’s requirements concerning participation in the formulation and implementation of development processes, for example, where the peoples concerned consider agriculture to be the priority, but are only consulted regarding mining exploitation after a development model for the region, giving priority to mining, has been developed.’ (emphasis added)346 Finally, it should be noted that Article 15 applies also when a legal title to the lands has not yet been granted to indigenous peoples.347 Also, the CEACR has specified that: ‘[T]he Convention covers not only areas occupied by indigenous peoples but also “the process of development as it affects their lives ... and the lands they occupy or otherwise use” (Article 7, paragraph 1). Accordingly, a project for exploration or exploitation in the immediate vicinity of lands occupied or otherwise used by indigenous peoples, or which directly affects the interests of such peoples, would fall within the scope of the Convention.’ 348 The protection of indigenous peoples’ right to traditional lands and ILO Convention No. 111 concerning Discrimination in Respect of Employment and Occupation The Discrimination (Employment and Occupation) Convention, 1958 (No. 111) deals with the broader issue of equality in employment and occupation. Unlike Convention No. 169, it has been widely ratified,349 which potentially enables it to reach out to indigenous peoples worldwide.350 The main entry point is represented by the principle of equality of opportunity and treatment in respect of access to occupation (Art. 1, para. 3). Indeed, in the case of indigenous peoples, access to traditional occupations is conditional upon their access to lands. The recognition of their rights of ownership and possession over the lands that they traditionally occupy thus appears to be a measure necessary to enable indigenous peoples to carry out their traditional activities. The UN treaty bodies The Human Rights Committee The HRC is mandated to monitor the implementation of the ICCPR. Besides receiving periodical reports from the States parties and formulating ‘Concluding Observations’ on them, the HRC is also enabled to receive inter-state complaints under Article 41 of the ICCPR and to examine individual complaints alleging the violation of some provisions of the ICCPR by states that are parties to the First Optional Protocol to the ICCPR. The issue of indigenous peoples’ right to land has been addressed by the HRC mainly in the context of the right to cultural integrity enshrined in Article 27 of the ICCPR. In the view of the HRC, the right to cultural integrity also covers the right to engage in economic activities which shape the way of life and the culture of certain communities.351 Accordingly, in many of its Concluding Observations, the HRC has called upon states to recognize indigenous peoples’ right to their traditional lands as instrumental in ensuring indigenous peoples’ enjoyment of their culture.352 In particular, the HRC has stressed the importance of carrying out the demarcation of indigenous peoples’ traditional lands in order for their right to lands and cultural integrity to be effectively secured without however mentioning the need to consult with indigenous MINORITY GROUPS AND LITIGATION: A REVIEW OF DEVELOPMENTS IN INTERNATIONAL AND REGIONAL JURISPRUDENCE 35