B.2. The illegal exploitation of the territories of the Community Council of the Communities of the Cacarica River basin 354. The ties between the territory and the natural resources traditionally used by the indigenous and tribal peoples, and that are necessary for their physical and cultural survival as well as the development and continuity of their world vision, are protected by Article 21 of the Convention. This is to ensure that they are able to continue living their traditional way of life and that their distinctive cultural identity, social structure, economic system, customs, beliefs and traditions will be respected, ensured and protected by the States. 603 Lack of access to the territories may prevent indigenous communities from using and enjoying the natural resources required to provide their subsistence through their traditional activities,604 and to practice their traditional health care systems, and other socio-cultural functions. This may expose them to precarious and infrahuman living conditions, to greater vulnerability to diseases and epidemics, and subject them to situations of extreme lack of protection.605 355. In this case, the Court notes that the logging activities ignored the Law concerning the black communities and its regulatory decree that governs the participation of the communities in the design, coordination and execution of the plans, programs and projects for economic development on their territories, as well as the role of the black authorities in the administration and management of their territories. In this regard, the Ombudsman’s Office has indicated that neither “CODECHOCÓ nor the logging companies implemented mechanisms to ensure the right to participation of the Community Council, through its management and administration organs.”606 Also, CODECHOCÓ granted logging permits to lower community councils that form part of the Cacarica High Council, thus causing internal divisions among them, and weakening and fragmenting community development management. 607 In this regard, the actions of CODECHOCÓ have been insufficient to avoid the violation of the different rights mentioned above, because CODECHOCÓ, as an environmental authority, has not used its policing function effectively to deal with the illegal exploitation.608 356. Based on all the above, the Court finds that the exploitation of the collective property of the communities of the Cacarica River basin was carried out illegally; furthermore, there is evidence that the authorities failed to protect the right to collective property even though they were aware, because of several on-site visits, of the illegal exploitation that was underway. In this regard, the domestic administrative or judicial remedies were not effective to rectify this situation. 357. The Court notes that neither the representatives nor the Commission referred in their arguments to which safeguard measures that protect the right to collective property had been violated by the State. Consequently, the Court is unable to rule in this regard, without prejudice to considering that the violation of the right to collective property contained in Article 21 of the 603 Cf. Case of the Yakye Axa Indigenous Community v. Paraguay, paras. 124, 135 and 137, and Case of the Kichwa Indigenous People of Sarayaku v. Ecuador, para. 146. 604 Cf. Case of the Yakye Axa Indigenous Community v. Paraguay, para. 164, and Case of the Kichwa Indigenous People of Sarayaku v. Ecuador, para. 147. 605 Cf. Case of the Sawhoyamaxa Indigenous Community v. Paraguay. Merits, reparations and costs, para. 73.61 to 73.74, and Case of the Kichwa Indigenous People of Sarayaku v. Ecuador, para. 147. 606 Cf. Ombudsman’s Office, Amicus curie presented before the Constitutional Court, “Forestry exploitation and human rights in the Cacarica River basin in the department of Chocó” (evidence file, folios 46539). 607 Also, there were agreement between Madarién and the Lower Councils without the existence of a prior favorable opinion by the Assembly or the Board of the Community Council in relation to the signature of commitments between the Lower Councils and the logging companies. These agreements were accepted by CODECHOCÓ. Cf. Ombudsman’s Office, Amicus curie presented before the Constitutional Court, “Forestry exploitation and human rights in the Cacarica River basin in the department of Chocó” (evidence file, folios 46563). 608 Cf. Ombudsman’s Office, Amicus curie presented before the Constitutional Court, “Forestry exploitation and human rights in the Cacarica River basin in the department of Chocó” (evidence file, folios 46522 and ff.). 116