A/HRC/30/52 group of investors, while the losses, such as environmental damage, depletion of natural resources and displacement of communities, were borne by society or the community as a whole. She highlighted the importance of including all stakeholders when investment decisions were made, including indigenous peoples, and of creating a climate of dialogue between all stakeholders. 39. Luis Vittor, a representative of the Coordinadora Andina de Organizaciones Indígenas, also focused on the impact of extractive industries and infrastructure megaprojects on the rights of indigenous peoples. Using two case studies from Latin America, he illustrated how extractive industries could negatively impact the rights of indigenous peoples to their lands, territories and resources, their right to health, cultural rights and the right to determine their own priorities for development. He pointed out that one of the main challenges faced by indigenous peoples with regard to extractive industries was access to remedy. He emphasized that, while there were useful instruments, such as the Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights and the Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples, the implementation gap remained enormous, which was having dire consequences for indigenous peoples. 40. Famark Hlawnching, the Chair of the Asia Indigenous Peoples Pact, presented a regional perspective from Asia. He stressed the importance of free, prior and informed consent, a principle that was often violated by business enterprises. He illustrated with examples how infrastructure and extractive projects often resulted in forced evictions, harassment of indigenous human rights defenders, and sometimes in enforced disappearances or extra-judicial killings. He pointed out that indigenous peoples faced barriers in access to justice in relation to those situations owing to limited financial resources, biased judicial systems and limited access to redress mechanisms. 41. Following the panel discussion, participants raised questions regarding possibilities for indigenous communities to have meaningful dialogue with business corporations and extractive industries. The panellists indicated that developing mechanisms for implementing the Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights at the national level could be one of the ways of addressing indigenous peoples’ concerns. 42. Statements from indigenous participants reflected a widespread pattern of human rights violations against indigenous peoples, raising many of the concerns discussed by the panellists, such as lack of free, prior and informed consent; lack of access to remedies; and the negative impact of extractive industries on rights to lands, territories and resources. They also highlighted the criminalization of protests by indigenous peoples as a growing concern. 43. In view of the range of violations faced by indigenous peoples, some participants considered a binding international instrument on business and human rights crucial for providing remedies for affected communities. 44. Mr. Barume thanked all the panellists and participants for contributing to the discussion. With specific reference to Africa, he pointed out that the historical and persistent non-recognition of traditional land rights of African indigenous communities was a contributing factor to indigenous peoples’ particular vulnerability to transnational corporations and other business enterprises. He indicated that stronger and legally protected rights of indigenous peoples over their lands were critical to the implementation of free, prior and informed consent. He drew a parallel with the recent landmark decision by the Supreme Court of Belize, which had ruled in favour of Maya land rights, affirming constitutional protection for their ancestral land rights and making explicit reference to the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples. The ruling had affirmed that the right to free, prior and informed consent was a fundamental tenet of traditional land 11