59 212. For the Mapuche people, Lonkos are traditional authorities whose role is a combination of spiritual matters and government business. In the Mapuche language the word Longko literally means “head”: every Lonko is thus the head of his respective community or Lof, which in turn is composed of a group of families or an extended family. Traditionally, the Mapuche Lonkos head up decision-making in the political, economic, military and administrative affairs of the community; they sometimes lead the religious and spiritual life of their communities, as they are the repositories of ancestral wisdom and preside over such important ceremonies as guillatun (ceremonies for prayers or petitions). The Werkén, for their part, are the Lonkos’ confidants and envoys and serve to reinforce the bond between family and community. Both the Lonkos and the Werkén are part of the Mapuche people’s community leadership and are thus key parts of its social structure; preservation of the Mapuche people’s socio cultural integrity and its continued existence over time hinges upon the leadership’s proper performance of its role. To impair or obstruct the performance of these functions thus affects the social structure and cultural integrity as a whole. 213. Time and time again the bodies of the inter-American human rights system have upheld the right of indigenous peoples and of their individual members to have their socio-cultural integrity protected and respected. The Court and the Commission have invoked the guarantees protected under the American Convention on Human Rights and the American Declaration of the Rights and Duties of Man; for interpretation purposes, they have also cited relevant provisions of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (particularly Article 27), the International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination, ILO Convention 169 concerning Indigenous and Tribal Peoples in Independent Countries, the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples, and other 209 instruments. 214. Thus, the IACHR (a) in its 1985 resolution on the situation of the Yanomami people of Brazil, held that “international law in its present state, and as it is found clearly expressed in Article 27 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, recognizes the right of ethnic groups to special protection on their use of their own language, for the practice of their own religion, and, in general, for all 210 those characteristics necessary for the preservation of their cultural identity” and that “the Organization of American States has established, as an action of priority for the member states, the preservation and strengthening of the cultural heritage of these ethnic groups and the struggle against the discrimination that invalidates their members' potential as human beings through the destruction of 211 their cultural identity and individuality as indigenous peoples;” (b) in its 1997 report on the situation of human rights in Ecuador, it wrote that “[w]ithin international law generally, and inter-American law specifically, (…)special protections for indigenous peoples may be required to ensure their physical and 212 cultural survival”;” and (c) in the 2002 report on the Mary and Carrie Dann case, the Commission emphasized that “by interpreting the American Declaration so as to safeguard the integrity, livelihood and culture of indigenous peoples through the effective protection of their individual and collective human rights, the Commission is respecting the very purposes underlying the Declaration which, as expressed in its Preamble, include recognition that “[s]ince culture is the highest social and historical expression of that spiritual development, it is the duty of man to preserve, practice and foster culture by 213 every means within his power.” 215. The indigenous peoples’ right to socio-cultural integrity has been expressly recognized in various provisions of the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples, under which “[i]ndigenous peoples have the right to maintain and strengthen their distinct political, legal, economic, 209 See, in this regard:: IACHR, Report No. 75/02, Case 11.140, Mary and Carrie Dann v. United States, December 27, 2002, paragraphs 124-132. IACHR, Report No. 40/04, Case 12.053, Maya Indigenous Communities of the Toledo District v. Belize, October 12, 2004, paragraphs 86-88. 210 IACHR, Resolution No. 12/85, Case 7615 – Yanomami People (Brazil), March 5, 1985, para. 7 211 IACHR, Resolution No. 12/85, Case 7615 – Yanomami People (Brazil), March 5, 1985, para. 9 212 IACHR, Report on the Situation of Human Rights in Ecuador, 1997, Chapter IX. 213 IACHR, Report No. 75/02, Case 11.140, Mary and Carrie Dann v. United States, December 27, 2002, paragraph 131.