B.10 Conclusion 231. On previous occasions, in cases concerning indigenous and tribal communities or peoples, the Court has declared violations to the detriment of the members of indigenous or tribal communities and peoples.300 However, international law on indigenous or tribal communities and peoples recognizes rights to the peoples as collective subjects of international law and not only as members of such communities or peoples. 301 In view of the fact that indigenous or tribal communities and peoples, united by their particular ways of life and identity, exercise some rights recognized by the Convention on a collective basis, the Court points out that the legal considerations expressed or indicated in this Judgment should be understood from that collective perspective. 232. The State, by failing to consult the Sarayaku People on the execution of a project that would have a direct impact on their territory, failed to comply with its obligations, under the principles of international law and its own domestic law, to adopt all necessary measures to guarantee the participation of the Sarayaku People, through their own institutions and mechanisms and in accordance with their values, practices, customs and forms of organization, in the decisions made regarding matters and policies that had or could have an impact on their territory, their life and their cultural and social identity, affecting their rights to communal property and to cultural identity. Consequently, the Court finds that the State is responsible for the violation of the right to communal property of the Sarayaku People recognized in Article 21 of the Convention, in relation to the right to cultural identity, in the terms of Articles 1(1) and (2) of this instrument. VIII.2 RIGHTS TO LIFE, TO PERSONAL INTEGRITY AND TO PERSONAL LIBERTY A. Arguments of the parties A.1 Right to Life302 233. The Commission argued that the State of Ecuador is responsible for having violated Article 4 of the Convention, in relation to Article 1(1) thereof, to the detriment of the Sarayaku People and its members, because its failure to comply with its obligation to guarantee them the right to property, allowing explosives to be buried on their territory, has created a permanent situation of danger that 300 Cf. Case of the Mayagna (Sumo) Awas Tingni Community v. Nicaragua; Case of the Moiwana Community v. Suriname, Preliminary objections, merits, reparations and costs; Case of the Yakye Axa Indigenous Community v. Paraguay, Merits, reparations and costs; Case of the Sawhoyamaxa Indigenous Community v. Paraguay; Case of the Saramaka People v. Suriname, Preliminary objections, merits, reparations and costs, and Case of the Xákmok Kásek Indigenous People v. Paraguay. 301 Thus, for example, Article 1 of the 2007 United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples establishes that: “Indigenous peoples have the right to the full enjoyment, as a collective or as individuals, of all human rights and fundamental freedoms recognized in the Charter of the United Nations, the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and international human rights law.” Article 3.1 of ILO Convention No. 169 states that: “Indigenous and tribal peoples shall enjoy the full measure of human rights and fundamental freedoms, without hindrance or discrimination. The provisions of this Convention shall apply without discrimination to male and female members of these peoples.” Similarly, the Committee on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, in General Comment No. 17 of November 2005, expressly stated that the right to benefit from the protection of the moral and material interests resulting from scientific, literary or artistic production also applies to indigenous peoples as collective subjects and not only to their members as individuals (paras. 7, 8 and 32). Subsequently, in General Comment No. 21 of 2009, the Committee interpreted that the expression “everyone” in Article 15.1.a) of the Convention “may denote both the individual and the collective subject. In other words, cultural rights may be exercised by a person: (a) as an individual; (b) in association with others, or (c) within a community or a group” (para. 8). In addition, other regional protection instruments, such as the 1986 African Charter on Human and Peoples’ Rights, have established special protection for certain rights of tribal peoples based on the exercise of collective rights. See, inter alia, the African Charter on Human and Peoples’ Rights: Article 20 which protects the right to life and self-determination of peoples; Article 21 which protects the right to freely dispose of their land and natural resources, and Article 22 which guarantees the right to development. 302 Article 4(1) of the American Convention states: “Every person has the right to have his life respected. This right shall be protected by law and, in general, from the moment of conception. No one shall be arbitrarily deprived of his life.” 66