A/HRC/27/65 indigenous justice systems, despite sharing certain characteristics, are highly diverse and context-specific. 22. The treaty bodies have highlighted some cases where differences may arise between indigenous juridical systems and international human rights law. In its concluding observations on Mexico, for example, the Committee on the Elimination of Discrimination against Women noted its concern about “cultural practices within the indigenous legal systems that are based on gender-stereotyped roles for men and women, such as the ‘bride price’, and that perpetuate discrimination against indigenous women and girls” (CEDAW/C/MEX/CO/7-8, para. 34). In the same vein, the Human Rights Committee expressed concern at the use of corporal punishment in the community-based justice system in the Plurinational State of Bolivia, and requested the State party to “conduct public information campaigns in the native indigenous campesino and other jurisdictions in order to raise awareness among the general public of the prohibition and harmful effects of corporal punishment” (CCPR/C/BOL/CO/3, para. 16). 23. There is a commonly held notion that indigenous juridical systems are static and unchanging. Indigenous juridical systems are in fact highly dynamic, and examples show that respect for both the legal autonomy of indigenous peoples and international human rights law are by no means mutually exclusive. As Sieder and Sierra argue, “[t]he norms, authorities and practices of indigenous justice systems reflect the changing relationships of indigenous peoples with dominant society, but they also reflect changes and tensions within indigenous communities and movements themselves”.16 The example of the alcaldía indígena in Santa Cruz del Quiché, Guatemala is illustrative of how some indigenous juridical systems are increasingly incorporating human rights norms and discourse. The alcaldía, “a supracommunal coordination of indigenous communal authorities[,] … works to mediate disputes and reduce the incidence of lynchings of suspected criminals, drawing on discourses about Mayan identity but also paradigms of universal human rights and the collective rights of indigenous peoples”.17 Gender discrimination issues are also being addressed within the alcaldía, with an increasing number of women being selected as alcaldes. This can be seen as a consequence of increasing participation of indigenous women in Mayan social movements, “but also of demands within indigenous communities that women’s dignity and physical integrity be respected”.18 24. Another possible source of tension is the collective nature of the rights of indigenous peoples, which could potentially conflict with the needs and rights of individuals within the community. The Committee on the Rights of the Child states clearly that “[i]n the case of children, the best interests of the child cannot be neglected or violated in preference for the best interests of the group”.19 E. Barriers and remedies 25. The challenges faced by indigenous peoples in freely exercising their juridical rights and pursuing juridical development within their societies are diverse and complex. In situations where State law recognizes a high degree of autonomy, the major challenges are in properly implementing these constitutionally recognized rights. In most cases, there is a gap between what international and national frameworks proclaim and the situation on the ground, as indigenous juridical systems continue to be subordinated despite legal 16 17 18 19 8 Sieder and Sierra, loc. cit. (see footnote 13 above), p. 4. Sieder, loc. cit. (see footnote 5 above), p. 106. Ibid. Committee on the Rights of the Child, General Comment No. 11, para. 30.