4 4. Halt the illegal entry of non-indigenous persons in the territories of the indigenous peoples Kuna of the Madungandí and the Emberá of Bayano and move the current occupant settlers to territories that do not belong to the indigenous peoples. In addition, ensure the free, prior, and informed consent of the the indigenous peoples Kuna of the Madungandí and the Emberá of Bayano to the plans, programs, and projects sought to be developed in their territories. 5. Establish an adequate and effective remedy that protects the rights of the indigenous peoples of Panama to claim and accede to their traditional territories, and protect their territories and natural resources from third persons, including respecting the right of indigenous peoples to enforce their customary laws through their justice systems. 6. Make individual and collective reparations for the consequences of the violations of human rights found in this report. In particular, repair the lack of protection of ancestral territories of the indigenous peoples Kuna of the Madungandí and the Emberá of Bayano, the lack of effective and prompt response by the authorities, and the discriminatory treatment to which they were subjected. 7. Adopt the measures necessary to prevent similar events from occurring in the future, in keeping with the duty to prevent violations and ensure the exercise of the fundamental rights recognized in the American Convention. Besides the need to secure justice for the victims, the IACHR notes that this case includes issues of inter-American public order. Specifically, the case affords the Court an opportunity to assess the scope and content of the obligation to provide redress to indigenous peoples when a determination has been made that it is not possible to return to them the lands and territories they traditionally occupied and used. The Court will be able to examine how failure to meet this obligation to provide redress constitutes an ongoing violation to the right to collective property of indigenous peoples who have been dispossessed of their ancestral lands and territories, as does a State’s failure to adopt measures that enable them to exercise their right to property when it is not possible to recover such lands and territories. Moreover, this case is representative of the intrinsic relationship between the effective and timely fulfillment of the obligations to recognize, award title for, demarcate, and protect the lands and territories of indigenous peoples and the situation of vulnerability and defenselessness [of such peoples] in the face of actions taken by third parties that have a profound impact on their traditional means of subsistence and on their social and cultural life. Because these matters have an important impact on inter-American public order, pursuant to Article 35.1(f) of the Rules of Procedure of the inter-American Court, the Commission would like to offer the following expert testimony: 1. An expert witness, whose name shall be provided as soon as possible, who will testify about the scope and content of the obligation to provide redress to indigenous peoples when a determination has been made that it is not possible to return to them the lands and territories they