CCPR/C/132/D/2552/2015 continued development of cultural identity and enriching the fabric of society as a whole. It is, therefore, of vital importance that measures that interfere with activities of cultural value to an indigenous community are taken with the free, prior and informed consent of the members of the community and respect the principle of proportionality so as not to endanger the very survival of the community and its members.24 3.10 In the present case, the authors claim article 27 was violated because not only were the members of the community not consulted, but serious environmental changes have resulted in the destruction of the natural resources that are the source of their cultural identity, thus violating their right to enjoy their culture. In particular, the authors claim that biodiversity loss in their territory has had significant impacts on their culture. First, they now have fewer food sources at their disposal, causing the loss of traditional know-how associated with their cultural practices in the areas of hunting, fishing, foraging and Guarani agroecology. Secondly, it has become impossible to conduct their baptism ceremonies (mitãkarai) owing to (a) the disappearance of the materials from the forest needed to build the dance houses (jerokyha), (b) the disappearance of the avati para variety of corn with which they made the liquor (kagüi) that constitutes a fundamental and sacred ritual element of the ceremony and (c) the impossibility of obtaining the wax used to make the ceremonial candles due to the mass extinction of forest bees (jateí). The loss of this ceremony has left children without a rite crucial to the consolidation of their cultural identity, and the last religious leaders (oporaiva) have been left without apprentices, which threatens the preservation of the community’s cultural identity. Thirdly, the community structure has eroded, as a number of families have left, fleeing the situation of extreme poverty brought on by the destruction of their territory’s resources. 3.11 The authors also claim a violation of article 2 (3) of the Covenant, read in conjunction with articles 17 and 27, owing to the lack of an effective judicial remedy for the community in the face of the reported breaches. Despite the fact that the Public Prosecution Service is responsible for initiating criminal proceedings ex officio in criminal matters relating to the environment and the rights of indigenous peoples, and for seeing such proceedings through to their conclusion, the investigation has been unreasonably prolonged and the prosecutor’s office has not obtained the 15 pieces of evidence that were requested (para. 2.25). The ineffectiveness of the proceedings has resulted in impunity for the perpetrators and has allowed the contamination to continue. 3.12 Furthermore, the State party has not explained why it did not accede to the defendants’ requests for a “conditional suspension of proceedings”, which could have given rise to an agreement on reparations (para. 2.21). 3.13 In addition, the Public Prosecution Service failed in its obligation to hire a technical consultant specializing in indigenous issues, who would have brought a cultural diversity perspective to the investigation, documented the specific impact of the violations on indigenous communities and ensured that their collective rights enshrined in the Constitution were respected.25 3.14 The authors request various measures of reparation. For instance, they request that the facts be investigated, that the authors be guaranteed access to all the stages and levels of the investigation, and that all those responsible for the violations be punished. They also request that all necessary steps be taken to prevent the reoccurrence of such acts in the future. In particular, a relevant measure that the Paraguayan State could take as a guarantee of nonrepetition would be the establishment of an agroenvironmental entity and the adoption of a code of agricultural and environmental procedure (para. 5.6). Another measure the authors request is a guarantee that the members of the community will receive appropriate comprehensive reparation, including the reimbursement of legal costs and, following consultations and the obtainment of their free, prior and informed consent, the implementation of plans to restore the agroenvironmental health of their territory and provide access to safe drinking water, sanitation, decent housing and public health services. 24 25 GE.22-15010 Ibid., paras. 7.2 and 7.6. Code of Criminal Procedure, arts. 432–433. 7