A/HRC/48/75 indigenous peoples is the impact that the COVID-19 crisis has had on indigenous people’s ability to take part in international events and to participate remotely.74 VII. Challenges in achieving self-determination 35. The non-recognition of indigenous peoples as indigenous peoples has a negative effect on the implementation of their rights under the Declaration, none more so than the right to self-determination. The constitutional recognition of indigenous peoples provides legal authority for the realization of their right to self-determination. Failure to legally recognize indigenous peoples obviates that right. In some States, the ongoing urgency to address the violent repression of indigenous peoples leaves little space for the realization of the right to self-determination. In many States, there are no debates about the principles of autonomy or pluralism to develop frameworks for indigenous self-determination, and they are often seen as a threat to the national security and territorial integrity of the State and as being against national developmental interests, rather than as a potential means of ensuring those rights. 75 36. For many indigenous peoples, their right to self-determination has advanced little since the adoption of the Declaration. Mass evictions and the dispossession of land for use in conservation projects or infrastructural development or by extractive industries and the privatization of indigenous lands for investment negatively affect their livelihoods, economic resources, social and cultural identity and their self-determination. Such is the case for the Pygmies/Twa in the Democratic Republic of the Congo, the Ogiek and Sengwer in Kenya the Maasai in the north of the United Republic of Tanzania and the Amazigh in North Africa.76 Development projects undertaken without adequate consultation with indigenous peoples affect the right of indigenous peoples to self-determine, and to their own development, such as the LAPSSET Corridor programme and the Mombasa-Nairobi Standard Gauge Railway in Kenya that cut across indigenous areas. 77 In Mexico, traditional territory of the Rio Yaqui peoples was transformed by irrigation districts, causing irreparable harm to the biodiversity of the area and a lack of water.78 37. The challenges in the pursuit of self-determination, and the violence often associated with it, are referred to in numerous submissions received by the Expert Mechanism. Recently in northeast India, numerous new or expanded peace accords were signed in an attempt to put an end to violence in the region, such as the Bodo Accords, the Tripura Indigenous (tribal) People Accords, the Karbi Accords, the Mizo Accord and the Naga Accords. 79 In the case of the Chittagong Hill Tracts, in Bangladesh, which has a semi-autonomous administrative authority, although legislation has been enacted to implement self-government provisions, the lack of constitutional recognition of the Chittagong Hill Tracts Peace Accord of 1997 leaves its implementation dependent upon the political will of the central Government.80 That has led to an increase in tensions between the central Government and the indigenous communities.81 Similarly, in Guatemala, although peace agreements, which included some level of autonomy for indigenous peoples, were converted into national law in 2005, the implementation of that law has been described as slow. 82 In Indonesia, to respond to the demand, and the aspirations of, the indigenous peoples of West Papua for independence, the 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 Submission from the Unrepresented Nations and Peoples Organization. Presentation made by Gam Shimray at the expert seminar convened by the Expert Mechanism in February 2021. See also the statement made by the Association de Femmes de Kabylie at the fourteenth session of the Expert Mechanism. Statement made by the Congrès Mondial Amazigh at the fourteenth session of the Expert Mechanism. Presentation made by Daniel Kobei at the expert seminar convened by the Expert Mechanism in February 2021. Submission from the University of Arizona. Joint submission from the Naga Peoples’ Movement, North East India. A/HRC/9/9/Add.1, para. 50; and see E/C.19/2011/6; and E/C.19/2014/4; and CCPR/C/BGD/CO/1, para. 12. Submission from the Unrepresented Nations and Peoples Organization. See A/74/149; A/HRC/39/17/Add.3; and Organization of American States, Inter-American Commission on Human Rights, “Situation of human rights in Guatemala: diversity, inequality and exclusion”; see also E/CN.4/2003/90/Add.2; and CERD/C/GTM/CO/16-17. 11