A/67/301 his reports examining the situation of indigenous peoples in particular countries. 1 Indigenous peoples have expressed concerns over their lack of participation in the nomination, declaration and management of World Heritage sites, as well as concerns about the negative impact these sites have had on their substantive rights, especially their rights to lands and resources. The Permanent Forum and the Expert Mechanism have both raised concerns in this connection in the course of their work. 2 34. The exact number of World Heritage sites that are within or near the traditional territories of indigenous peoples, or that otherwise affect them, is not certain and the World Heritage Committee has apparently never undertaken a comprehensive review of this, but the indications are that there are dozens of such sites. 35. In the meantime, there is still no specific policy or procedure which ensures that indigenous peoples can participate in the nomination and management of these sites. The Operational Guidelines for Implementation of the World Heritage Convention, which set out the procedure for the inscription of properties on the World Heritage list and the protection and conservation of sites, are silent on the issue of participation by indigenous peoples. The guidelines provide only that States parties to the Convention are encouraged to ensure the participation of a wide variety of stakeholders in the identification, nomination and protection of World Heritage properties. 36. Furthermore, States are not specifically required to provide any information on the indigenous peoples and local communities living in or around a site they nominate for World Heritage designation, or review the kind of impact a site might have on the rights of these groups. In this connection, the templates provided in the operational guidelines for nominating sites do not contain fields requiring States to describe the potential impact a site might have on indigenous peoples or to provide information about whether affected peoples have been asked about and agree with the nomination, although States are asked to indicate the major categories of land ownership, including traditional or customary ownership. 37. At its thirty-fifth session, in July 2011, the World Heritage Committee took an important step in adopting decision 35 COM 12E, in which States parties are encouraged to involve indigenous peoples and local communities in decisionmaking, monitoring and evaluation of the state of conservation of World Heritage sites and to respect the rights of indigenous peoples when nominating, managing and reporting on World Heritage sites in the territories of indigenous peoples. However, until amendments are made to the operational guidelines, these proposals may not fully take root. It is worth noting also that in 2001, the World Heritage Committee rejected proposals put forward by indigenous peoples to establish a council of experts of indigenous peoples, which was to act as an advisory body to the Committee. 38. Other significant developments have taken place in cooperation with the advisory bodies to the World Heritage Committee, which play key roles in the declaration of sites. In 2011 the Permanent Forum on Indigenous Issues noted and welcomed the initiative of the Committee and its three advisory bodies, the International Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN), the International Council __________________ 1 2 10 See, for instance, A/HRC/21/47/Add.2, para. 50. See, for instance, E/2010/43-E/C.19/2010/15, para. 131 and A/HRC/18/42, annex, para. 38. 12-46087