E/CN.4/2004/80 page 9 18. In March 2000, the Nairobi High Court ruled that the eviction of between 5,000 and 10,000 members of the Ogiek tribe from Tinet forest in Kenya was legal even though it affected the rights of hundreds of families to their ancestral lands. The Special Rapporteur invites the Government of Kenya to respect the rights of the Ogiek people to their traditional habitat.2 19. The Government of New Zealand has informed the Special Rapporteur that the individual and collective rights of Maori are recognized by the justice system in two ways. First, although the Treaty of Waitangi does not provide directly enforceable rights, the New Zealand courts have shown a proactive approach to interpreting and applying the principles of the Treaty where these are included in specific legislation. Secondly, the Waitangi Tribunal has been established to hear individual and collective Maori claims against the Crown for breaches of principles of the Treaty. The process for the settlement of historical (pre-1992) grievances is now well established and involves both apologies and reparations, as well as measures to provide ongoing recognition of cultural interests in specific sites and resources. The Tribunal, whose bicultural mandate and jurisdiction are established in the Treaty, continues to provide a forum for the expression and investigation of the collective and individual rights of Maori. 20. Some national laws maintain the alienation and exclusion of indigenous peoples from the justice system altogether. For example, the Constitution of Nepal declares the State to be a Hindu kingdom and Nepali language the official language; there is no recognition of the indigenous peoples and discriminatory legislation prohibits indigenous peoples from carrying out their own traditional activities, including hunting and fishing, and other expressions of their cultural identity. For the same reasons, no indigenous person may become an official in any capacity of the country’s judiciary.3 21. Reports indicate that in the Russian Federation, the rights of indigenous peoples are still not protected, despite guarantees to the contrary in the 1999 Federal Law on the Guarantees of the Rights of Indigenous Numerically Small Peoples of the Russian Federation.4 The main problem appears to be the lack of implementation of the Federal Law at the regional and local levels, a concern expressed repeatedly by international bodies and experts.5 22. In several of the countries he visited, the Special Rapporteur has come across situations where there appears to be incompatibility between human rights legislation pertaining to indigenous peoples and other sectoral laws (such as legislation regarding the environment or the exploitation of natural resources, or the titling of private landholdings). When asked to rule on competitive claims on such issues, the courts may sometimes render judgements that protect the rights of indigenous communities, but just as often they may hand down rulings that are detrimental to these rights. The Special Rapporteur has always recommended that the rights of indigenous peoples as set out in national and international laws should have priority over any other interests and has called upon Governments to make efforts to adjust their legislations accordingly. The cases mentioned above are representative of the issues encountered by indigenous communities. The Special Rapporteur calls upon the justice system in all countries to attach the highest priority to the human rights of indigenous peoples and to decide court cases in accordance with the international principles of human rights; he also invites the Commission on Human Rights to recommend such action to member States.