10 ownership of the land that is their traditional habitat, which must be sufficient in terms of extent and quality to allow the community to live in accordance with its traditional manner of life. That provision places the State under the obligation to acquire those lands and transfer them to the Community free of cost, after making sure that said lands are the traditional habitat of the indigenous nation. The traditional habitat, in addition to being the traditional place of settlement of the indigenous people, must have ecological and environmental conditions that are in accordance with the community’s traditional manner of life. Likewise, Paraguay has implemented legislation that develops the right of indigenous people embodied in the Constitution and establishes procedures to be followed for land allocation, acknowledgment of leaders, and acknowledgment of legal status as an indigenous community. The procedure to legalize lands of indigenous communities, although it has yielded positive results in cases in which the estate owners have been willing to negotiate the transfer of property of the land they claim, has been patently ineffective in cases in which the landowners have been unwilling to do so. It is enough for any estate owner, in face of claims regarding indigenous rights to his land, to argue that it is under rational use. This is a problem of legal architecture, of lack of legal procedures with the authority to make indigenous rights effective. In this regard, all material rights of indigenous communities to their lands, embodied in a progressive manner by the Paraguayan legal system, are insufficiently concrete due to lack of a basic component of any legal provision: its operational or procedural nature, to translate the abstract provision into a practical reality, in an efficient and operational manner. Furthermore, allocation of funds to INDI has been insufficient for implementation of public policies to benefit the indigenous communities. c. Statement by Antonio Aylwin Oyarzún, expert witness International and comparative jurisprudence and doctrine have addressed the issue of indigenous peoples’ rights to their territories. In this regard, they have developed the concept of “indigenous territory,” which refers not only to material aspects, linked to physical spaces that belonged to their ancestors, and to resources in those areas, but also to non-material –political, symbolic, and cultural- components. They have also recognized that ancestral indigenous occupation and use of land, territory, and natural resources gives rise to an “original indigenous entitlement” to them, which is prior to that of the States and to the process of colonization and, therefore, it cannot be unilaterally extinguished without the indigenous peoples’ consent. This concept has major implications in terms of comparative law, enabling acknowledgment and demarcation by the States of the indigenous peoples’ lands, territories, and resources, even if there are other deeds granted by the former. Chapter V of Paraguay’s 1992 Political Constitution focuses on Indigenous Peoples. These provisions are more favorable, in several respects, for indigenous peoples’ rights to their lands, territories, and natural resources than international human rights instruments regarding this subject matter, as they are in accordance with evolution of international jurisprudence and doctrine. Thus, the Paraguayan constitutional legal order constitutes an appropriate framework for protection of indigenous peoples. However, as in many States, difficulties for actual exercise of rights embodied in the Constitution derive primarily from lack of public policies to make said human rights effective.