A/HRC/30/52 implement indigenous peoples’ rights, misunderstandings regarding key terms in the Declaration, inconsistencies between State legislation and the Declaration, “rights ritualism” on the part of some States, a lack of awareness and a lack of capacity among relevant sectors of society. Furthermore, the refusal to recognize the status of some indigenous peoples had led to systematic violations of their human rights, in particular rights to lands, territories and resources, identity, culture and self-determination. 60. In addition, participants identified an urgent need for States to intensify their efforts to achieve the ends of the Declaration and implement the rights contained therein, including the principle of free, prior and informed consent; lands, territories and resources rights; treaty rights; self-determination; cultural rights; and the right to participate in decisionmaking. 61. It was emphasized that, in order to halt violations of the human rights of indigenous peoples and achieve the ends of the Declaration, the outcome document of the World Conference on Indigenous Peoples should be used as a guide for action and the realization of the rights of indigenous peoples. Importantly, it was noted that through the adoption of the outcome document, specifically paragraphs 3 and 4, States reaffirmed their solemn commitment to the rights contained in the Declaration. 62. Megan Davis, the Chair of the Permanent Forum on Indigenous Issues, highlighted forthcoming events and processes which would impact indigenous peoples and the implementation of the Declaration. They included: deliberations concerning the post-2015 development goals; the third International Conference on Financing for Development; the twenty-first session of the Conference of the Parties to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change; negotiations at the World Intellectual Property Organization concerning traditional cultural expressions and traditional knowledge; the revision of the World Bank social and economic safeguards; and, of particular relevance in the light of the Expert Mechanism’s recent study on cultural heritage, the World Heritage Committee’s review of its operational guidelines on the nomination of World Heritage Sites. 63. On the issue of the involvement of indigenous peoples in such events, many participants advocated for the creation of a specific accreditation system for indigenous peoples’ governing institutions. Participants stated that a unique accreditation mechanism would work to implement the right of indigenous peoples to participate in decision-making, and recognize the unique status of indigenous peoples’ governing institutions. The mechanism should be governed by flexible modalities that took into account the unique circumstances of indigenous peoples globally. 64. Many participants emphasized that States should create national action plans for the achievement of the ends of the Declaration in partnership with indigenous peoples and consistent with the rights of the Declaration. The national action plans should incorporate awareness-raising programmes to promote widespread understanding of the Declaration, including through the media. It was also recommended that the universal periodic review should require States to report on the arrangements for national action plans and other measures to implement the Declaration. 65. Many participants noted that regional and national human rights institutions played an important role in the monitoring, protection and implementation of the rights of indigenous peoples. There was one example of indigenous peoples themselves taking steps at the national level to monitor the implementation of the Declaration. The Monitoring Mechanism of the National Iwi Chairs Forum from New Zealand/Aotearoa, which made its inaugural statement at the eighth session of the Expert Mechanism, provided a report on the implementation of the Declaration in New Zealand/Aotearoa (A/HRC/EMRIP/2015/CRP.3). 15