to use and enjoy the protected property; both the property and modes of possession of territories by indigenous and tribal people may differ from the non-indigenous conception of domain, but are protected by the right to property75. The unique relationship between indigenous people and their traditional territory "may include the traditional use or presence, be it through spiritual or ceremonial ties; settlements or sporadic cultivation; hunting, fishing or seasonal or nomadic gathering; use of natural resources associated with their customs; and any other characteristic of their culture" 76. Article 21 of the Convention protects any of these modes77. 2. The right to property of the Xucuru indigenous people and its members 2.1 In regard to the delay in the recognition 70. As established by the IACHR and the Inter-American Court, under Article 21 of the American Convention, indigenous people have property and control rights over lands and resources they have historically occupied and, therefore, have the right to be legally recognized as owners of their territories, and to obtain a duly registered legal title to their land. 78 71. The IACHR also notes that Brazil ratified ILO Convention No. 169 concerning Indigenous and Tribal Peoples in Independent Countries ("Convention 169"), on 25 July 2002. With the ratification of Convention No. 169, the State bound itself to adopt special measures to guarantee indigenous people the effective and unrestricted enjoyment of human rights and fundamental freedoms, respecting their social and cultural identity, their customs, traditions and institutions. Under Articles 21 and 29 of the American IA Court, Case of the Sawhoyamaxa Indigenous Community v. Paraguay. Merits, Reparations and Costs. Judgement of March 29, 2006. Series C No. 146. Par. 120. 76 IA Court, Case of the Sawhoyamaxa Indigenous Community v. Paraguay. Merits, Reparations and Costs. Judgement of March 29, 2006. Series C No. 146. Par. 131. 77 Indeed, as the Commission has stated, the general international legal principles applicable in the context of human rights of indigenous include "the right of indigenous people to legal recognition of their varied and specific forms and modalities of control, ownership, use and enjoyment of territories and property" [ IACHR, Report No. 75/02, Case 11.140, Mary and Carrie Dann v. United States, December 27, 2002, par. 130]; indigenous and tribal people have a right to communal property on lands they have traditionally used and occupied, and "the nature of that right is based on the modalities of land use and customary land tenure" [IACHR, Report No. 40/04, Case 12.053, Maya Indigenous Communities of the Toledo District v. Belize, October 12, 2004, par. 151] for each village. For the Court, "ignoring the specific versions of use and enjoyment of property, springing from the culture, customs and beliefs of each people, tantamount to holding that there is only one way to use and dispose of property, which in turn, would render illusory the protection of Article 21 of the Convention for millions of people "[IACHR. Sawhoyamaxa Indigenous Community vs. Paraguay. Merits, Reparations and Costs. Judgment of March 29, 2006. Series C No. 146, para. 120]. This interpretative approach is supported in terms of other international instruments, indicating international attitudes toward the role of traditional systems of land tenure in modern systems of protection of human rights; for example, Convention No. 169 expressly establishes the state's duty to "safeguard the right of people [indigenous] to use lands that are not exclusively occupied by them, but to which they have traditionally had access for their traditional activities and subsistence ", paying particular attention to cases of nomadic peoples and shifting cultivators [Convention 169, art. 14.1]. The right to legal recognition of forms and modalities own control, ownership, use and enjoyment of territories, property and natural resources by indigenous and tribal peoples are also protected by Art. 27 of the International Covenant and Political protects the right of persons belonging to ethnic, religious or linguistic minorities to enjoy their own culture minorities, in accordance with other group members [IACHR, Report No. 75/02, Case 11.140, Mary and Carrie Dann v. United States, December 27, 2002, par. 130, footnote No. 97], as these forms and characteristics of the territories regarding modalities are manifestations of the culture of indigenous peoples. The Human Rights Committee has explained that "culture manifests itself in many forms, including a particular way of life associated with the use of land resources, especially in the case of indigenous peoples" [Human Rights Committee, General Comment No. 23: The rights of minorities (Article 27 of the ICCPR.), 08/04/94, UN Doc CCPR / C / 21 / Rev.. 1 / Add.5, paragraph 7; cited in IACHR, Report No. 75/02, Case 11.140, Mary and Carrie Dann v. United States, December 27, 2002, para. 130, footnote No. 97]. Therefore, the protection of cultural rights of indigenous people may include protection of modes of relationship with the territory through such traditional activities as fishing or hunting [Human Rights Committee, General Comment No. 23: The rights of minorities (Art. 27 of the ICCPR), 08/04/94, UN Doc. CCPR / C / 21 / Rev. 1 / Add.5, paragraph 7; cited in IACHR, Report No. 75/02, Case 11.140, Mary and Carrie Dann v. United States, December 27, 2002, par. 130, footnote No. 97], to the extent that hunting, fishing and gathering is an essential element of indigenous culture [Court HR. Caso Yakye Axa Indigenous Community vs. Paraguay. Merits, Reparations and Costs. Judgment June 17, 2005. Series C No. 125, par. 140]. This complex notion of the right to indigenous property is also reflected in the UN Declaration, under which "indigenous people have the right to own, use, develop and control the lands, territories and resources that they possess by reason of traditional property or other traditional occupation or use, as well as those who have otherwise acquired "[UN Declaration, supra nota 1, art. 26.2]. 78 See, inter alia, IACtHR. Case of the Mayagna (Sumo) Awas Tingni Community v Nicaragua. Merits, Reparations and Costs. Judgment of August 31, 2001. Series C No. 79, par. 137; IACHR, Report No. 40/04, Case 12.053, Maya Indigenous Communities of the Toledo District (Belize), October 12, 2004, par. 115 75 18