CRC/C/97/D/172/2022 children must be at the very heart of the process, from their consideration in the context of impact assessments to their effective participation in processes of consultations aimed at obtaining their free, prior and informed consent. 9.23 In the light of the above, the Committee considers that the State party has not demonstrated how the standards established in international human rights law for the participation of Indigenous Peoples, including Indigenous children, were correctly taken into account in the decision to grant a permit for exploration on the authors’ traditional lands, which they use for reindeer herding, and that their culture, identity and standard of living were affected, in violation of articles 8, 27 and 30, read in conjunction with article 12, of the Convention. 9.24 Lastly, the Committee recalls that to ignore the right of Indigenous Peoples to use land and to refrain from taking appropriate measures to ensure respect in practice for their right to give their free, prior and informed consent whenever their rights may be affected by projects carried out on their traditional territories constitutes a form of discrimination, as it results in nullifying or impairing the recognition, enjoyment or exercise by Indigenous Peoples of their rights to their ancestral territories, natural resources and, as a result, their identity. 28 The Committee moreover considers that the discrimination suffered by an Indigenous People also has an impact on children, the preservation of whose cultural identity is crucial, as they represent the continuity of their distinct people. 9.25 The Committee therefore concludes that the information before it reveals that the granting of the exploration permit without having ensured the effective participation of the authors through a consultation process based on a prior assessment of the consequences of the exploration works for Sami reindeer herding amounted to violations of the authors’ rights under articles 8, 27 and 30, read in conjunction with article 2 (1), of the Convention. 9.26 In the light of all the above, the Committee, acting under article 10 (5) of the Optional Protocol, concludes that the granting of the permit violated the authors’ rights under articles 8, 27 and 30, read alone and in conjunction with articles 2 (1) and 12, of the Convention. 10. The State party should therefore provide the authors with effective reparation for the violations suffered, including by effectively reviewing its decision to permit the mineral exploration project, after a child rights-oriented impact assessment, as a first stage that would make it possible to carry out an adequate process to obtain the free, prior and informed consent of the authors’ siida, in which the authors should participate effectively. The State party is also under an obligation to take all the steps necessary to prevent similar violations from occurring in the future. In that regard, the State party is requested to pursue its efforts to amend its legislation to enshrine the international standard of free, prior and informed consent, specifically by ensuring the participation of affected Indigenous children, and to include an environmental and social impact assessment, including a children’s rights-oriented impact assessment. 11. In accordance with article 11 of the Optional Protocol, the Committee wishes to receive from the State party, as soon as possible and within 180 days, information about the measures it has taken to give effect to the Committee’s Views. The State party is requested to include information about any such measures in its reports to the Committee under article 44 of the Convention. The State party is also requested to publish the present Views, to have them translated into the official languages and into Northern Sami and to disseminate them widely. 28 Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination, Ågren et al. v. Sweden, para. 6.7, citing the jurisprudence of the Inter-American Court of Human Rights and the African human rights system. 15