A/HRC/27/52 30. Also essential to reconciliation are affirmative steps of redress to remedy the ongoing manifestations of harm. Throughout the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples there are calls for “effective mechanisms” for redress in connection with a range of rights. Indeed, as noted by the previous Special Rapporteur in his first report to the Human Rights Council, the Declaration in its entirety can be understood as fundamentally a “remedial” instrument that “aims at repairing the ongoing consequences of the historical denial of the right to self-determination and other basic human rights affirmed in international instruments of general applicability” (A/HRC/9/9, para. 36). Specifically, redress is required for any action aimed at depriving indigenous peoples of their integrity as distinct peoples (art 8, para. 2 (a)); any action with the aim or effect of dispossessing them of their lands, territories or resources (art. 8, para. 2 (b)); any form of forced assimilation or integration (art. 8, para. 2 (d)); for the taking of their cultural, intellectual, religious or spiritual property (art 11); depriving them of their means of subsistence (art. 20, para. 2); as well as for the development, utilization or exploitation of their mineral, water or other resources (art. 32, para. 2). 31. Perhaps the clearest manifestation that redress is still needed for indigenous peoples around the world is their continued lack of access to and security over their traditional lands. In that regard, in article 28 of the Declaration, it is stated that “indigenous peoples have the right to redress, by means that can include restitution or, when this is not possible, just, fair and equitable compensation, for the lands, territories and resources which they have traditionally owned or otherwise occupied or used, and which have been confiscated, taken, occupied, used or damaged without their free, prior and informed consent” and that this compensation “shall take the form of lands, territories and resources equal in quality, size and legal status or of monetary compensation or other appropriate redress”. While advances have without a doubt been made over the past several decades in returning lands to indigenous peoples and protecting their existing land bases, more remains to be done nearly everywhere. There are, of course, a number of ways in which land restitution can and has taken place, including through executive decrees, judicial decisions or negotiated arrangements, although complications can arise, especially when competing private third party interests are involved. 32. Finally, meaningful reconciliation must also include steps to ensure the nonrecurrence of violations. This is essential for rebuilding trust and restoring confidence in the State and indeed, it is difficult to envision true healing by indigenous peoples in an environment in which violations continue to occur. While States have gone a long way towards putting an end to the most egregious human rights violations against indigenous peoples, abuses are still occurring in all the countries in which they live. Current violations often present the most urgent issues that need addressing and are often the focus of attention of the international human rights system. However, addressing those violations does not take the place of the still much needed deeper reconciliation efforts that recognition and redress can provide. 33. The Special Rapporteur would like to point out that implementing all of the abovementioned measures does not necessarily guarantee that true reconciliation will occur. An essential component of the process also involves shifting attitudes on a personal and societal level, which the Special Rapporteur fully acknowledges is not an easy task. She discusses particular concerns in that regard in the following section. It should also be noted that, in 2014, the Expert Mechanism on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples continued its study entitled “Access to justice in the promotion and protection of the rights of indigenous peoples — restorative justice, indigenous juridical systems and access to justice for indigenous women, children and youth, and persons with disabilities” (see A/HRC/EMRIP/2014/3/Rev.1), including a discussion on restorative justice and provides further comments on the issue. 11