135. The Court points out that Article 10 of the 1992 Lelydorp Peace Accord established the State’s undertaking to the indigenous and tribal peoples that it would demarcate and grant legal title to their territories (supra para. 51). 136. The evidence in the case file, as well as the on-site procedure conducted by the Court’s delegation, reveal that, at the present time, Suriname still does not recognize the right to collective property of indigenous and tribal peoples, nor do mechanisms or procedures exist to delimit the traditional territories. Consequently, the Kaliña and Lokono peoples have no type of guarantee or title with regard to the territory and habitat they have occupied traditionally, or to the land they possess currently. In addition, the State has not taken any steps to delimit, demarcate or grant title to the traditional territory, or to ensure to the Kaliña and Lokono peoples the use and enjoyment of their territory in relation to third parties. 137. Regarding the area of the traditional territory and the occupation by other tribal people (Maroons), in this case the representatives have indicated that the traditional territory covers an area of around 133,945 ha and have provided a map with the approximate areas covered by this territory (supra paras. 8 and 30). 138. The Court has established that the territorial rights of the indigenous peoples “encompass a different and broader concept that is related to their collective right to survival as an organized people with control of their habitat as an essential condition for the reproduction of their culture, for their very survival, and to implement their life projects.”176 “Ownership of the land ensures that the members of indigenous communities conserve their cultural heritage.”177 139. It should be clarified that, in order to delimit, demarcate and grant title to the traditional territory in this case, the Court finds that the right to property of the indigenous and tribal peoples includes full guarantees over the territories they have traditionally owned, occupied and used in order to ensure their particular way of life, and their subsistence, traditions, culture, and development as peoples.178 Nevertheless, there may be other complementary or additional traditional areas to which they have had access for their traditional or subsistence activities (which may have other purposes), regarding which they should be ensured, at least, the necessary access and use. 140. In addition, the Court has verified that, within the territory that the Kaliña and Lokono peoples allege is theirs traditionally, there are at least 10 Maroon settlements that are excluded from their claims, namely: 1) Albina; 2) Papatam; 3) Mankelekampu; 4) Mariakondre; 5) Eduardkondre; 6) Akoloikondre; 7) Bamboesi; 8) Koni; 9) Moengotapu, and 10) Adjoemakondre (supra para. 47). However, the Court has insufficient information to clarify the arguments relating to possible Maroon settlements in: 1) Bilokondre; 2) Krontokondre; 3) Soke; 4) Pakirakondre; 5) Mopikondre; 6) Onikaikondre; 7) Manjabong; 8) Bonikondre or Baajoebekampu; 9) Nengrekriki; 10) Solegakampu, and 11) Brunswijkkamp (supra paras. 48 and 49). 176 Case of the Yakye Axa Indigenous Community, supra, para. 146, and Case of the Kuna Indigenous Community of Madungandí and the Emberá Indigenous Community of Bayano and their members, supra, para. 143. 177 Case of the Yakye Axa Indigenous Community, supra, para. 146. 178 Similarly, article 26 of the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples recognizes the right to lands, territories and resources which they have traditionally owned, occupied or otherwise used or acquired, as well as the right to own, use, develop and control these lands; thus, States must give legal recognition and protection to these lands, respecting the customs, traditions and land tenure systems of the indigenous peoples concerned. UN, United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples, supra. 38