E/CN.4/2003/90 page 8 developer or company to obtain free, prior and informed consent of indigenous peoples for certain activities, such as (a) exploration, development and use of natural resources; (b) research-bioprospecting; (c) displacement and relocation; (d) archaeological explorations; (e) community-based forest management; and (f) entry of the military.8 17. In decision T-652-98 regarding the exploitation of natural resources in traditional territories of indigenous peoples, the Constitutional Court of Colombia argued that “… indigenous peoples are subjects of fundamental rights. If the State does not guarantee their right to subsistence (survival), these communities will not be able to materialize their right to cultural, social and economic integrity which is stated in the Constitution”.9 Article 2 of the Constitution of Mexico (amended in 2001) recognizes the land rights of indigenous communities but subjects them to the rights of “third parties”, a legal limitation which indigenous organizations and legal scholars consider rather as a step backwards in the recognition of their collective rights. 18. Indeed, the Special Rapporteur notes that numerous formally recognized legal rights of indigenous peoples are not fully implemented in practice, either in the courts by way of final adjudication determined by the judiciary, or as a result of new legislative acts which in fact weaken or reduce previously legislated rights. This concern has been expressed by indigenous participants at WGIP.10 In relation to such regression in the case of Australia, the Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination (CERD), recommended that “… close scrutiny continue to be given to any other proposed State and territory legislation to ensure that protection of the rights of indigenous peoples will not be further reduced”.11 19. In various United Nations and other forums, indigenous organizations have signalled their concern about negative impacts of major development projects on their environments, livelihoods, lifestyles and survival. One of the recurrent issues is the loss of land and territories that indigenous communities suffer. The lack of control over their natural resources has become a widespread worry. Very often these projects entail involuntary displacements and resettlement of indigenous communities which happen to lie in the way of a dam, an airport, a game reserve, a tourist resort, a mining operation, a pipeline, a major highway, etc. As a result, violations of civil and political, economic, social and cultural rights occur with increasing frequency, prompting indigenous peoples to launch major protests or resistance campaigns in order to bring public attention to their plight, besides engaging the judicial system or appealing for administrative redress, as well as lobbying the political system. 20. A review of some recent complaints about alleged human rights violations of indigenous peoples in connection with activities surrounding the planning or execution of major development projects of different kinds draws attention to a number of focal points around the world. The High Court of Australia delivered a landmark decision on 8 August 2002, which denied native title rights over any mineral or petroleum resources in the Miriuwung-Gajerrong native title claim first lodged in 1994. A majority of the court found that native title rights did not apply to leases for the Argyle diamond mine or the Ord River irrigation project in Western Australia.12 The Mapuche people in Chile argue that they face the threat of physical and cultural disappearance caused by transnational logging companies.13 An indigenous community in Kenya reported to WGIP that “today, this destruction of our cultures and land