20 connection with that, it was inducing the chiefs of the communities to abandon the Lhaka Honhat Association and their claim to a single title to property. 79. In a communication dated December 26, 2001, received in March 2002, the Lhaka Honhat Association claimed that the officials of the Provincial Government of Salta had refused to recognize the communities’ representation by the Association, a position which had led them to distort their territorial claims in the sense that, according to the Government, the indigenous were claiming a single title to the entire extension of Fiscal Lots 55 and 14 excluding the creole inhabitants, which did not 82 correspond to the communities’ real claims. The terms of this communication were later rejected by the representatives of the National and Provincial Government, who reiterated the need to advance in the 83 negotiations through a meeting with the presence of all of the interested parties. 80. In the same communication of December 26, 2001, the representatives of the Lhaka Honhat Association stated that the Commission created in Decree 339/01 of the Government of Salta had not met, or at least their technical representative had not been summoned to any meeting. Consequently, they had undertaken their own independent process of surveying the population and mapping the Lots, 84 which had already produced important data on the indigenous presence and occupation of the territory. th In that regard, the petitioners presented to the IACHR, on August 5 , 2002, a copy of an “Advance Report” of the study conducted by ASOCIANA (Social Support of the Anglican Church of North Argentina), entitled “Cartographic study of the occupation and use of lands among the indigenous communities of Fiscal Lots 14 and 55, in the Municipality of Santa Victoria Este, Department of Rivadavia, 85 Province of Salta, Argentina.” 81. On July 8, 2002, the petitioners reported to the IACHR that the Government of Salta had continued to send engineers to the area in dispute, to carry out measurements and offers of parcels to the 86 rd communities and the creole families. A few days later, the petitioners reported that on July 3 , 23 creole delegates representing the different zones of Lots 55 and 14 had met with the Lhaka Honhat Association and its advisors, after which they sent a communication to the Government of the Province of Salta concerning the measurements and possible granting of titles to property, insisting that there was no agreement for them to proceed, consequently they considered them to be illegal. They requested “1. The halting of any procedure to measure or grant title to the lands which is not carried out in the framework of the law, that is, with the agreement of all of the inhabitants. 2. We reiterate the proposal of November 28, 2001, and request the acceptance of the surveys made by the aboriginal and creoles, with the help of 87 their advisors ASOCIANA and Fundapaz, in the aforementioned Lots.” 82. On August 5, 2004, the petitioners reported to the IACHR that, in spite of the different commitments assumed by the Provincial Government, measurement and demarcation works had 88 continued to be carried out in the lands of both fiscal lots, by staff hired by the provincial authorities. Attempts at reaching a friendly settlement of the case before the IACHR (2000-2005) 83. After the initial petition was transmitted to it by the IACHR, the National Government offered its mediation between the petitioner communities and the Provincial Government of Salta, in 82 Communication by the State to the IACHR received on May 3, 2002, transmitted to the petitioners on July 16, 2002. 83 Communication by the State to the IACHR received on May 3, 2002, transmitted to the petitioners on July 16, 2002. 84 Communication sent by the Lhaka Honhat Association to the IACHR on December 26, 2001, transmitted to the State on March 21, 2002. 85 Report submitted by the petitioners to the IACHR on August 5, 2002, and later transmitted to the State on October 21, 86 Communication by the petitioners to the IACHR, received on July 8, 2002, and transmitted to the State on July 26, 2002. 2002. 87 Letter attached to the petitioners’ communication to the IACHR, received on July 26, 2002, and transmitted to the State on July 26, 2002. 88 Communication by the petitioners to the IACHR, received on August 5, 2004.