A/HRC/39/68 beyond dictatorship regimes. Providing a variety of past examples, he argued that truth commissions led by indigenous peoples should not only focus on the final written report but also on the processes, and in particular the space given to oral witness, in order to ensure that all processes were compatible with the needs of indigenous peoples. 56. Participants noted good practices of States in building strong relations with indigenous peoples. In some countries where processes of reconciliation were taking place, it was considered important to observe and value the reconciliation processes as a whole, not only the outcome documents. It was highlighted that reconciliation processes should address both indigenous and non-indigenous peoples. Participants noted the importance of developing strategies to engage with the entire population as a means of raising awareness on local histories and making contexts and information more visible. 57. Participants also underlined the need to improve and develop frameworks for dialogue, possibly using protocols based on the Declaration. Furthermore, participants stressed the need for a consensual understanding of the concepts used in reconciliation processes, as indigenous and non-indigenous peoples could have different interpretations. In that regard, participants mentioned the importance of access to justice and the recognition of indigenous justice systems. Finally, panellists noted the importance of following up on all the recommendations and procedures involved in reconciliation processes. VIII. Coordination meeting of United Nations indigenous rights mechanisms 58. Under item 5, the members of the Expert Mechanism held a private meeting with the Chair of the Permanent Forum, the Special Rapporteur on the rights of indigenous peoples and a representative of the Board of Trustees of the United Nations Voluntary Fund for Indigenous Peoples. Participants considered the following issues: coordination of thematic studies; a joint statement for the International Day of the World’s Indigenous Peoples on the theme of indigenous peoples’ migration and movement; coordination of activities around the International Year of Indigenous Languages; coordination of country engagement activities; and the broadening of the consultation process to enable the participation of indigenous peoples’ representatives and institutions in meetings of relevant United Nations bodies on issues affecting them. IX. Interactive dialogue with national human rights institutions, regional human rights institutions and indigenous human rights institutions 59. Mr. Tsykarev, in opening the interactive dialogue, recalled the importance of item 6 in relation to the amended mandate of the Expert Mechanism. He stressed the enhanced engagement of the Expert Mechanism with national and regional human rights institutions not only during annual sessions but also during intersessional meetings. Regarding the latest developments, Mr. Tsykarev drew attention to the draft discussion paper emerging from the annual general meeting of the Global Alliance of National Human Rights Institutions with the purpose of identifying areas of cooperation between National Human Rights Institutions and the Expert Mechanism (see annex). 60. Mr. Tsykarev thanked the Danish Institute for Human Rights for supporting the participation of the national human rights institutions at the session and welcomed the following panellists: Suzanne Shatikha Chivusia, member of the Kenya National Commission on Human Rights; Gwendolyn Pimentel-Gana member of the Commission on Human Rights of the Philippines; Konstantin Robbek, Ombudsman for small-numbered indigenous peoples’ rights of the Republic of Sakha (Yakutia), Russian Federation; Marjorie Herrera Castro, member of the Special Protection Unit, National Human Rights Institution of Costa Rica; and Joel Hernández, member of the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights. 11