A/HRC/21/52 point of concern conflicts between resource extraction laws and those laws which recognized indigenous peoples’ rights, and noted that more attention needed to be paid to the Declaration in the universal periodic review process. 64. Grand Chief John cited strategic plans developed by indigenous peoples as an effective means of supporting indigenous peoples’ efforts to secure the recognition and protection of their rights relating to lands, territories and resources. 65. Observers raised concerns about the militarization of indigenous peoples’ lands, territories and resources. Questions were also posed concerning urban indigenous peoples, practical steps that may be taken by States to implement the Declaration, the advice that might be offered to those indigenous peoples living in States where the State asserted that they were in conformity with the Declaration despite failing to implement the Declaration, and whether the mechanisms would be able to aid in the development of educational tools to assist in raising the awareness and knowledge of indigenous peoples about the Declaration. 66. The Special Rapporteur emphasized that dialogue between indigenous peoples and States should be the basis for the implementation of the Declaration, and noted that it came into existence to address the failure of existing legal arrangements to secure the full enjoyment of human rights by indigenous peoples. 67. International Chief Littlechild noted the global focus of the Declaration and emphasized that the text included significant areas of agreement which may guide implementation. He noted that work was being done to develop plain language versions of the Declaration and that the translation of the Declaration into indigenous languages served as an effective tool for enhancing its understanding. International Chief Littlechild asked those States that had asserted that they had met the standards of the Declaration to offer research-based evidence of that achievement. The evidence could serve as the basis for further dialogue. 68. Grand Chief John requested continued focus on the development of knowledge and understanding of the Declaration and encouraged academic centres to incorporate the Declaration into their curricula. He discussed concerns that the taking of indigenous peoples’ lands, territories and resources had forced indigenous peoples into judicial forums that were not cognizant of international laws, norms and standards applicable to indigenous peoples, and he was critical of continued references to and application of the doctrine of discovery. 69. Observers inquired as to what steps might be taken to resolve issues relating to the violation of indigenous peoples’ rights when domestic and diplomatic avenues had been exhausted and whether a new mechanism could be recommended by the Expert Mechanism, outside the context of the universal periodic review, to enhance monitoring and evaluation of the implementation of indigenous peoples’ human rights. Observers also asked what steps might be taken to convince States to implement an instrument which many States considered to be aspirational and whether it was necessary to move beyond the State context to the development of international mechanisms focused on the effective implementation of indigenous peoples’ human rights. The value and approach of collaboration between the three mandates as demonstrated through the recent work on extractive industries was also raised for discussion. 70. International Chief Littlechild explained that there were provisions within the Declaration which supported the development of a mechanism to monitor it. 71. The Special Rapporteur stated that cooperation between the three mechanisms on the issue of extractive industries was essential and noted that biannual coordination meetings were held between the three mechanisms in this regard. He also emphasized the value of 16