A/66/288 ethnic, linguistic or religious groups, including indigenous peoples, can be established by objective criteria and cannot depend on a unilateral decision by a State. 95. Businesses cannot use limited recognition, or absence of explicit recognition, of indigenous peoples in the countries in which they operate as an excuse not to apply the minimum international standards applicable to indigenous peoples, including in cases where States are opposed to the application of such standards. Due diligence therefore requires that companies identify in advance the existence of indigenous peoples potentially affected by their activities and how they might be affected by such activities. 2. Rights to land, territories and natural resources 96. A second feature of the due diligence incumbent on companies whose activities have a potential impact on indigenous peoples is the identification of indigenous ownership or possession and use of land, territories and natural resources, a question of vital importance to the effective enjoyment of human rights by indigenous peoples. The lack of official recognition of land or resource rights by the State does not constitute adequate grounds for a company’s failure to respect indigenous peoples’ rights to land in accordance with international standards. Due diligence therefore requires that companies conduct an independent assessment of the rights to which indigenous people may lay claim in accordance with the criteria laid down in international instruments. 97. Companies should bring to bear an intercultural understanding that goes far beyond mere legal considerations. International standards have highlighted the special relationship existing between indigenous peoples and their traditional territories, which form the basis of their distinct identities and cultures. Companies must understand that, independent of the rights over their lands or resources to which they may lay claim under national law, indigenous peoples have maintained and continue to maintain ties to their traditional territories. Moreover, these ties are collective, and therefore go far beyond the individual rights of the members of these groups. 98. Companies should also put in place special guarantees of compensation for the removal of indigenous communities and peoples from their lands, including with regard to projects that involve the acquisition of indigenous lands held under individual titles. In such cases, international standards require that alternatives that limit or avoid such relocation be sought and that compensation in the form of other land be provided as a matter of priority. 3. The State’s duty to consult and related corporate responsibilities 99. The principle of due diligence also requires that companies recognize the duty of States to consult indigenous peoples (and, in some cases, to obtain their consent) prior to the adoption of measures that may affect them directly and, in particular, in relation to projects that affect their traditional territories. Companies must not attempt to replace States in situations where international standards require States to bear direct responsibility for holding consultations; indeed, they must promote the full assumption by States of such responsibility. Furthermore, companies would fall short of their due diligence with respect to human rights if they agreed to proceed 11-44942 19