A/HRC/39/17/Add.3 the rights of indigenous peoples, such as the Forests Act, the Hydrocarbons Act and the General Electricity Act.6 Development of jurisprudence 23. The Special Rapporteur notes that some progress has been made with regard to jurisprudence on the rights of indigenous peoples as a result of rulings by the Constitutional Court that international human rights standards form part of the constitutional corpus. A number of judgments have recognized the right to collective ownership and the role of the indigenous authorities and systems of justice. Relevant cases include those of the Indigenous Municipality of Chichicastenango in Quiché, the indigenous community of Chuarrancho in Guatemala, the eight Q’eqchi’ communities of Sierra Santa Cruz, El Estor and Livingston in Izabal, the Cho’orti’ communities of Camotán in Chiquimula, the Guild of San José Poaquil in Chimaltenango, the Mam community of Comitancillo in San Marcos and the Ixil community of Nebaj in Quiché. 24. It should be noted that, in various rulings referred for consultation, international standards were correctly included in the courts’ reasoning but not in the measures set out in the ruling and there are clear gaps in the implementation of legislation to monitor compliance with treaties and to ensure that any action taken is reasonable. These discrepancies do not provide indigenous peoples with the necessary legal security for their rights, nor do they help to resolve the basic problems that gave rise to claims. An additional difficulty is the repeated failure to comply with the rulings that are handed down. Institutional framework and public policies 25. Guatemala has a number of State institutions dealing with indigenous peoples, some established on the basis of the Peace Agreements, such as the Office for the Defence of Indigenous Women’s Rights and the Presidential Commission on Discrimination and Racism against Indigenous Peoples. In 2017, the Public Prosecution Service and the judiciary established the Indigenous Peoples’ Secretariats and there is the Indigenous Peoples Committee in the Congress. In addition, 34 public institutions have set up “indigenous windows”. According to information received, indigenous institutions were allocated only 0.12 per cent of the national budget in 2017. 26. Representatives of these institutions provided information on the work that they do. A number of them operate on an inadequate legal basis, which leaves them dependent on the goodwill of whatever government is in power, with little political weight and a shortage of staff and funding. After two decades of existence, it is worth asking whether the existence of so-called indigenous institutions is not perpetuating the segregation of indigenous issues in State activity and the tendency to see them as marginal. 27. Guatemala has adopted various public policies, strategies and programmes aimed at indigenous peoples or directly affecting them in a number of different areas. The National Compensation Programme was adopted in 2003 to compensate victims of the armed conflict. The State policy on coexistence and the elimination of racism and racial discrimination was approved in 2006. There is a project to foster and safeguard Garifuna culture, but it was drawn up without Garifuna participation and has no budget. Meanwhile, Bill No. 4335 on the establishment of a Garifuna development institute is awaiting approval. 28. In view of the fact that the indicators show an increase in poverty among indigenous people, alongside a rise in inequality and the hoarding of land, it is clear that these actions have not produced effective results. Indigenous organizations have stated that, on the whole, measures and programmes have been designed without proper participation by indigenous people and do not respect their right to their own development models or fit in with their own visions. Moreover, they have no political relevance and lack sufficient funding. 6 6 A/HRC/18/35/Add.3, paras. 22, 23, 55 and 56. GE.18-13268