A/HRC/30/52 VII. Follow-up to thematic studies and advice 49. Mr. Mansayagan recalled the mandate of the Expert Mechanism and listed the studies and advice it had issued previously. He recalled that the studies and advice were intended to provide a better understanding of the provisions of the Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples and to suggest specific action that States, indigenous peoples, civil society, international organizations, national human rights institutions and others could take in order to further its implementation. He noted that the studies of the Expert Mechanism placed special emphasis on the participation of indigenous peoples themselves in decisions that affected them. 50. A representative of the Indigenous Persons with Disabilities Global Network acknowledged the usefulness of the previous studies of the Expert Mechanism as guidance tools for advocacy and policy development. The Network suggested that the Expert Mechanism consult indigenous persons with disabilities in the development of its future studies and advice. 51. Mr. Tsykarev urged States to ensure that initiatives that had been identified as good practices in previous studies of the Expert Mechanism were not weakened. He encouraged both States and indigenous peoples to use the opportunity afforded by the agenda item to keep the Expert Mechanism abreast of recent developments regarding the themes of its previous studies. VIII. Study and advice on the promotion and protection of the rights of indigenous peoples with respect to their cultural heritage 52. Mr. Tsykarev expressed his gratitude to the University of Lapland, which had, jointly with OHCHR, organized an expert seminar on the topic of the study in February 2015. He thanked all the experts who had participated in the seminar for their valuable contribution to the study and all the States, indigenous peoples’ organizations, nongovernmental organizations and national human rights institutions that had provided submissions to the study. He gave a detailed overview of the study, focusing on the advice with respect to cultural heritage that the Expert Mechanism had provided to States, indigenous peoples, international organizations and museums. 53. The draft of the study was well received by representatives of State and indigenous peoples. Participants commended the Expert Mechanism for highlighting the holistic and intergenerational nature of cultural heritage, and emphasizing the links between cultural heritage and lands, territories and resources. Indigenous representatives also welcomed the emphasis placed on free, prior and informed consent in relation to cultural and natural heritage. Given the alarming pace at which indigenous languages were being lost, several participants drew attention to the need to preserve and promote indigenous languages through effective mother tongue education programmes. Participants also requested the Expert Mechanism to pay special attention to the need to revitalize the customary practices and traditional governance systems of indigenous peoples. 54. Many participants highlighted the fact that, in paragraph 27 of the outcome document of the World Conference, States committed themselves to developing fair, transparent and effective mechanisms for access to and repatriation of ceremonial objects and human remains. During the discussion, indigenous representatives discussed several cases in which they had been unable to recover ceremonial objects, human remains and other articles related to their heritage from museums, collectors and other repositories. 13