E/CN.4/2004/80/Add.3 page 16 While the Special Rapporteur was in Temuco, various Mapuche organizations from Regions VIII, IX and X, including the organization Aukin Wallmapu Ngulam (Council of All Lands), the Autonomous Mapuche Commission (COTAM), the Coordinating Committee of Mapuche Communities in Conflict in Panguipulli, the Coordinating Committee of Mapuche Communities in Traiguén, Newen Mapu de Ercilla, and the Coordinating Committee of Mapuche Communities in Collipulli, presented him with documents in which they claim to have been the victims of “unjust persecution via the courts” since 1992 on account of their activities in support of their claim to have their traditional rights observed. The individuals interviewed condemned in particular several procedural irregularities in the cases brought against them for their campaigns over the land issue and drew the Special Rapporteur’s attention to the “police cordon” allegedly thrown around them for taking part in actions to recover their ancestral lands and territories. The complainants submitted the case to the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights, which, in February 2002, declared the complaint on alleged violations of the rights protected in various articles of the American Convention on Human Rights admissible. This declaration followed the failure of several attempts to find a friendly settlement in the dispute between the Chilean Government and the Mapuche petitioners. 39. In addition, the Senate Commission on the Constitution, Legislation, Justice and Regulations prepared a study on the Mapuche conflict in relation to public order and public safety, a copy of which was given to the Special Rapporteur. The Commission expresses “its deep concern over the serious changes in the applicability of the principle of legal safeguards in the regions of Bíobío and Araucanía. It considers that the Government is not fulfilling its obligations to protect farmers and legitimate landowners from criminal or even terrorist acts. It acknowledges that only a minority of Mapuche organizations are committing acts of violence against farmers, but these are unjustified, as their rights to the land are guaranteed in the existing laws, and the conflict is due to poverty and the ineffectiveness of government policies”. 40. Some members of the Senate Commission, expressing a minority view, maintain that the Mapuche conflict cannot be reduced to a question of public order and safety and that the demands of indigenous communities must be dealt with, a view shared by the Special Rapporteur. The so-called Mapuche conflict should be viewed from every angle, and all of its aspects, not just public safety, need to be considered. This would help forestall actions against Mapuche organizations that are being used as a way to criminalize a legitimate demand and to turn what is essentially a social conflict into a judicial one.