A/HRC/33/58 intercultural dialogues on indigenous legal systems, which had ensured that Tribunal staff were aware of the right to self-determination and autonomy of indigenous peoples and communities and that those principles were implemented on the ground. 24. Indigenous organizations mostly highlighted the lack of any legislation or plan to develop legislation in relation to the protection or promotion of self-determination and autonomy. Furthermore, an indigenous peoples’ organization from Brazil reported that there were several proposals currently before the parliament that would undermine the rights of indigenous peoples. C. Participation in decision-making and free, prior and informed consent 25. The questionnaire posed the following question: “Have specific legislative, policy or administrative measures been adopted to implement rights relating to participation in decision-making, including the obligation to seek free, prior and informed consent? If yes, please provide the details. If not, please outline any plans to develop legislative, policy or administrative measures in this area.” 26. Finland responded that it was intending to revise the Act on the Sami Parliament (974/1995) and that the Ministry, in that context, would reiterate that the current obligation to negotiate under section 9 should be changed to better comply with the principle of free, prior and informed consent. Finland also referred to a State-owned enterprise, Metsähallitus, which conducted business activities on State-owned land and waters. Under the administering law, municipal advisory committees were appointed in the Sami homeland regions and they were composed of representatives from various bodies, including the Sami Parliament, the municipality, reindeer-herding cooperatives, the fisheries region and commercial fisheries. Those committees issued opinions to Metsähallitus. 27. Consistent with the Declaration, Australia recognized the importance of engaging in good-faith negotiations with indigenous peoples in relation to decisions that affected them. One example was the Empowered Communities initiative being implemented in eight regions across Australia. Australia also interpreted the principle of free, prior and informed consent as consistent with the territorial and political sovereignty of Australia. 28. The response of the Plurinational State of Bolivia highlighted the fact that the right to free, prior and informed consultation was established in the country’s Constitution. The State also had a number of other pieces of legislation relating to consultation in the context of specific activities, such as extractive operations. 29. Canada responded that aboriginal treaty rights were protected under section 35 of the Constitution. The Supreme Court of Canada required the Crown to consult with indigenous peoples and accommodate where possible their interests in cases where indigenous constitutionally protected rights could be infringed. Canada would be undertaking a review, in partnership with First Nations, Inuit and Metis Nation, of laws, policies and operational practices to ensure the Crown was respecting those constitutionally protected aboriginal and treaty rights. 30. Mexico ensured that indigenous peoples were adequately consulted when the National Commission for the Development of Indigenous Peoples undertook its aforementioned monitoring of the extent to which legislation was consistent with the Declaration. For example, that consultation process was recently followed in Baja California, Baja California Sur, Durango, Sinaloa and Campeche. 31. Several indigenous peoples’ organizations emphasized that free, prior and informed consent was either not referred to or was not well articulated in laws and policies and 5