A/73/176 and arrangements and give some initial insight on how they can contribute to sustainable development. 66. While no example is a perfect case of indigenous self-governance, as understood above, those outlined below can be regarded as steps towards increasing indigenous peoples’ control over their destinies and development processes. The examples are primarily based on information from previous country visit reports and research by the mandate holder, as well as on submissions received in the preparation of the present report. The aim is to continue the conversation on the topic together with indigenous peoples and State Governments, to further document existing practices of self-governance and provide recommendations in this regard. 67. Most indigenous governance systems are traditional institutions that have existed in indigenous communities over centuries and still guide decision -making, conflict resolution and interaction between members of the indigenous community as well as externally. In many cases, these institutions include customary and written laws and dispute resolution and adjudicative mechanisms. 19 Some are recognized by the State, while others are not. In recent decades, many contemporary forms of such institutions, including indigenous parliaments, councils and organizations, have also been developed, often in cooperation with States, with a view to addressing indigenous peoples’ call for self-determination and control over their own internal and local affairs. Hybrid models aimed at combining traditional and contemporary forms of indigenous governance exist as well. 68. There are vast differences among these systems and practices of self governance, in terms of their histories, institutional structures, areas of jurisdiction, legal grounding, cooperation with the State and the concrete experiences and challenges they have faced (see A/72/186). As a result of indigenous peoples’ intrinsic relationship to their lands, resources and territories, many of their governance systems have a territorial base. There are also cases in which indigenous peoples have increased control and participation in governance in a specific sector, such as culture, language, health or education. 20 69. Related to self-governance is the issue of adequate and meaningful participation of indigenous peoples in broader public affairs, if they so choose. Not neglecting the long struggle that indigenous peoples had to fight to obtain full citizenship rights, most indigenous peoples today hold the formal right to vote and participate in electoral politics. That being said, multiple obstacles remain for indigenous peoples in terms of efficient access to that right, owing to continued structural marginalization and a lack of recognition and official registration, among other barriers. Moreover, individual electoral rights are not enough to ensure self-governance by indigenous peoples. Specific venues are needed for their collective participation, through their own institutions, in the State’s affairs and in its decision-making bodies. As for State practice, it is not uncommon to have seats reserved for indigenous peoples’ representatives in national parliaments. Furthermore, several States have established national institutions devoted to indigenous peoples, including special departments within different ministries, parliamentary commissions on indigenous issues, specialized public prosecutor’s offices or joint bodies such as dialogue tables (A/72/186). Provided such institutions ensure participation by indigenous peoples in decision-making through their own representatives, as set out in article 18 of the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples, they can play an important role in advancing dialogue between indigenous peoples and States. __________________ 19 20 18-11856 Anaya (2004), p. 153. Åhrén (2016), p. 142. 17/23