216. For their part, both the African Commission on Human and Peoples’ Rights, in cases alleging the violation of Articles 17(2) and 17(3) of the African Charter on Human and Peoples’ Rights,285 and the Committee on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (CESCR) 286 and, to some extent, the European Court of Human Rights in cases regarding minorities,287 have referred to the right to cultural identity and the collective dimension of the cultural life of native, indigenous, tribal and minority peoples and communities. 217. The Court considers that the right to cultural identity is a fundamental right - and one of a collective nature - of the indigenous communities, which should be respected in a multicultural, pluralistic and democratic society.288 This means that States have an obligation to ensure that indigenous peoples are properly consulted on matters that affect or could affect their cultural and social life, in accordance with their values, traditions, customs and forms of organization. Similarly, ILO Convention No. 169 recognizes the aspirations of indigenous peoples to “exercise control over their own institutions, ways of life and economic development and to maintain and develop their identities, languages and religions, within the framework of the States in which they live.”289 285 In Communication No. 276/2003, the African Commission on Human and Peoples’ Rights declared: “protecting human rights goes beyond the duty not to destroy or deliberately weaken minority groups, but requires respect for, and protection of, their religious and cultural heritage essential to their group identity. [… The Commission] notes that Article 17 of the [African] Charter is of a dual dimension in both its individual and collective nature, protecting, on the one hand, individuals’ participation in the cultural life of their community and, on the other hand, obliging the state to promote and protect traditional values recognised by a community. It thus takes culture to mean that complex whole which includes a spiritual and physical association with one’s ancestral land, knowledge, belief, art, law, morals, customs, and any other capabilities and habits acquired by humankind as a member of society – the sum total of the material and spiritual activities and products of a given social group that distinguish it from other similar groups. It has also understood cultural identity to encompass a group’s religion, language, and other defining characteristics (para. 241). It also observed: “By forcing the community to live on semi-arid lands without access to medicinal salt licks and other vital resources for the health of their livestock, the Respondent state have created a major threat to the Endorois pastoralist way of life.” The African Commission also indicated that the State “has a higher duty in terms of taking positive steps to protect groups and communities like the Endorois, but also to promote cultural rights including the creation of opportunities, policies, institutions.” Considering that “the Respondent State has not taken into consideration the fact that by restricting access to Lake Bogoria, it has denied the community access to an integrated system of beliefs, values, norms, mores, traditions and artifacts closely linked to access to the Lake,” the African Commission concluded that the State had violated Articles 17(2) and 17(3) of the Charter, finding that “the very essence of the Endorois’ right to culture has been denied, rendering the right, to all intents and purposes, illusory” (paras. 250 and 251). 286 “The strong communal dimension of indigenous peoples’ cultural life is indispensable to their existence, well-being and full development, and includes the right to the lands, territories and resources which they have traditionally owned, occupied or otherwise used or acquired. Indigenous peoples’ cultural values and rights associated with their ancestral lands and their relationship with nature should be regarded with respect and protected, in order to prevent the degradation of their particular way of life, including their means of subsistence, the loss of their natural resources and, ultimately, their cultural identity. States parties must therefore take measures to recognize and protect the rights of indigenous peoples to own, develop, control and use their communal lands, territories and resources, and, where they have been otherwise inhabited or used without their free and informed consent, take steps to return these lands and territories.” Economic and Social Council, E/C.12/GC/21/Rev.1, para. 36. 287 In the Case of Chapman v. the United Kingdom (No. 27238/95 ECHR 2001-I), the Court acknowledged that Article 8 protects the right of a minority (“Gypsy”) to maintain its identity (para. 93). In the Case of Gorzelik and others v. Poland (No. 44158/98, para. 92, February 17, 2004), the European Court observed that the need to protect cultural identity is also important for the proper functioning of a democracy. References to all the cases mentioned in this paragraph are found in “Cultural Rights in the case-law of the European Court of Human Rights,” Research division ECHR, January 2011, pp. 9 to 12. 288 The 2007 United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples, widely accepted with the adhesion of 143 States (including Ecuador), includes the right of these Peoples to freely determine their political situation, to freely pursue their economic, social and cultural development, to participate in the adoption of decisions that affect them, and to participate fully, if they so wish, in the political, economic, social and cultural life of the State (Articles 3, 4, 5,18, 19, 20, 23, 32, 33 and 34). In the specific case of Ecuador, the recognition of this right is so clear that, today, the 2008 Constitution itself recognizes the right to self-determination in different ways, among others, by declaring that all indigenous communes, communities, peoples and nations have the right to “maintain, develop and strengthen their identity, sense of belonging, ancestral traditions and forms of social organization and, to that end, the Constitution guarantees the respect and promotion of the customs and identities of indigenous peoples in all aspects of life,” and in the case of the “peoples living in voluntary isolation,” the State “shall adopt measures to guarantee their lives, ensure respect for their self-determination and their wish to remain in isolation and protect the observance of their rights.” 289 ILO Convention No. 169. Fifth preambular paragraph. 62