A/HRC/12/34/Add.3 page 17 as the route to bringing “an end of the discrimination based on class, caste, language, sex, culture, religion and region by eliminating the centralized and unitary form of the State”. (art. 138). 60. While specific proposals for a federal system vary greatly, the Special Rapporteur observed during his meetings with indigenous representatives that the demand for federalism in general represents a clustering of assertions that effectively, if not expressly, are centred on the right to self-determination and include demands for local autonomy and political participation; rights over territories, lands and resources; and cultural integrity. These are all legitimate demands that are upheld by international standards to which Nepal has committed and that should be secured in the country’s new constitutional order, whatever ultimately may be the State’s overall political-administrative configuration. 61. The Special Rapporteur would like to stress the need for flexibility and innovation in the discussions over the diverse proposals for federalism. The debate about federalism should be a principled dialogue focused on the underlying objectives and legitimate interests of all concerned, rather than on specific outcomes. Federalism should be seen as a means, not as an end in itself or as a panacea. 62. The right to self-determination that is central to federalism demands should be a key point of reference for this principled dialogue. The United Nations Declaration explicitly affirms this right for indigenous peoples in particular (art. 3), in the framework of the respect for the territorial integrity of the States in which they live (art. 46). Self-determination for any given sphere of community has two complementary dimensions in relation to the structuring of Government authority: one inward looking having to do with internal or local self-governance and another, which is outward looking, having to do with participation in the larger decision-making processes of Government. 1. Autonomy 63. In regard to the first dimension of self-determination, the Declaration affirms the right of indigenous peoples to self-government or autonomy in matters related to their internal or local affairs (art. 4). This includes the right to maintain and develop their own authority structures including customary laws, in accordance with universal human rights standards (arts. 5, 34-35; Convention 169, arts. 8-9), and to means of financing the autonomous functions (Declaration, art. 4). Therefore, recognition of authority structures of the Adivasi Janajati, including, where they exist, traditional justice systems and customary law, should in some form be a feature of the emerging political order in Nepal, in the framework of universal human rights standards. 64. In endeavouring to graft indigenous autonomy onto a federal system in Nepal, it may be useful to look to examples elsewhere in which States and indigenous peoples have formalized arrangements for the exercise of autonomous powers at the local level, as well as institutional mechanisms to regulate the interaction between State law and customary norms. These include, for example, the self-governance arrangement for the Inuit territory of Nunavut in Canada, the constitutional recognition of indigenous autonomous authority in Colombia, the system of municipal governance that provides a measure of indigenous autonomy in Mexico, the autonomy regime for indigenous-populated territories in Nicaragua, the comarca system in Panama, and