A/HRC/27/52/Add.3 event that no agreement is reached. It is feared that, as a result, the consultation process will be applied inconsistently among different sectors. In that regard, the guide has been criticized for not being sufficiently clear or specific about the minimum requirements relating to these issues, and until now there has been no alternative mechanism to provide guidance for decisions taken by those promoting the process. 39. In effect, owing to this lack of guidance, there are signs that the various sectors promoting the consultation process are developing practices that give rise to concern. For example, in the hydrocarbon sector, as mentioned in paragraph 15 above, according to the Ministry of Energy and Mines, the consultation would be conducted by the State-owned company Perupetro before the supreme decree is issued approving the conclusion of contracts for the exploration and exploitation of oil and gas deposits.29 For other activities, such as the development of pipelines and the transportation of gas or modification of a concession, the consultation would be conducted by the General Directorate of Hydrocarbons before the concession is granted or modified. While it is important that indigenous peoples should be consulted in the early decision-making stages, it would seem that no provision has been made for the involvement of indigenous peoples in decisions beyond the very early stages. 40. To date, the Prior Consultation Act has not been implemented in relation to mining projects and it is still unclear which consultation procedure would be applied in this context within the new legislative regime. The new Single Consolidated Text on administrative procedures, which describes the process used by the Ministry of Energy and Mines for granting concessions (see para. 16 above), identifies three stages in which to conduct prior consultation: (a) prior to authorization of the construction works; (b) prior to the start of exploration activities; (c) prior to approval of the mining plans.30 However, there is no provision for consultation before the mining concession is granted, which precedes all these stages, assuming that the mining concession does not, in itself, constitute “authorization for the holder to carry out exploration, exploitation or mineral extraction”.31 The Special Rapporteur considers that this position should be reviewed because in any case a concession for potential mining activities on indigenous land is definitely a decision that is likely to affect the rights of indigenous peoples. At the same time, the Government has informed the Special Rapporteur that, in addition to prior consultation, after the concession has been granted, a public participation process is initiated to communicate “the effects of the concession rights granted by the State, the mining activities, the environmental obligations, and the rights of the populations involved, amongst others”.32 41. Another key stage for the implementation of the Prior Consultation Act, required under the Act itself,33 is the establishment of a database of the country’s indigenous peoples.34 The purpose of the database is to facilitate identification of the groups who need to be consulted. According to the Act, the database “does not directly grant any rights”.35 The Office of the Deputy Minister of Intercultural Relations is also preparing a land registry of indigenous territories, both titled and untitled, to serve as a reference tool for the identification of indigenous groups affected by a project. 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 GE.14-07246 Ministerial Decision No. 350-2012-MEM/DM. Ministerial Decision No. 003-2013-MEM/DM, Annex 1. Letter dated 13 January 2014 addressed to the Special Rapporteur by the Deputy Minister for Energy, Edwin Quintanilla Acosta. See Supreme Decree No. 028-2008-EM. Act No. 29785, art. 20; see also Implementing Regulations, art. 29. Authorized under Deputy Ministerial Decision No. 202-2012-MC. Implementing Regulations, art. 29. 11