50 foundation for the development of their culture, their spiritual life, their wholeness and their economic 169 survival” . 175. The IACHR has clearly stated that “for historical reasons and because of moral and humanitarian principles, special protection for indigenous populations constitutes a sacred commitment of 170 the States” . This implies that whatever rights the non-indigenous may claim over the lands, the State must devise mechanisms which can accommodate such rights or claims without sacrificing the prevailing territorial rights of indigenous and tribal peoples. 2. The indigenous territorial claim in the present case 176. After a detailed assessment of the indigenous territorial claim process under study, the IACHR considers that the State of Argentina incurred international responsibility for having violated Article 21 of the American Convention, as a consequence of (i) having failed to comply with the legislation that the authorities themselves promulgated to grant a joint collective property title to the ancestral lands of all of the communities, and for the same reason, having violated the agreements that were later formalized as provincial decrees and thereby created enforceable legal rights in domestic law; and (ii) having failed to create and apply an effective and prompt procedure for transferring title to indigenous territorial property. 177. Nonetheless, the IACHR considers that from October, 2007 to date, the State with the active participation of the indigenous and non-indigenous communities of the area – including the indigenous communities that form part of the Lhaka Honhat Association, has made visible and significant advances in the process,of recognizing indigenous territorial rights. This stage of the process should be finalized following the parameters established by inter-American jurisprudence, to provide a real opportunity for the practical materialization of the right to indigenous territorial property in this case. In the present report the IACHR shall issue a set of recommendations and guidelines for the culmination of this participative process, in order to ensure full reparation of the violated rights and promote the effective enjoyment of the petitioners’ territorial rights. 2.1. Failure of the Provincial Government to Implement and Enforce Legal Rights 178. It has been proven in the present case that the Provincial Government signed several agreements with the indigenous communities of the area, and promulgated Decrees enacting said 171 agreements into law. In these decrees the Provincial Government committed itself to, and assumed the legal obligation of, recognizing a single territorial property title shared by all of the indigenous communities of Fiscal Lots 14 and 55. The communities expressed through their representatives a unanimous common will to achieve this result. 179. The commitment of the Provincial Government of Salta to grant a common, shared territorial property title to all of the indigenous communities of Fiscal Lots 14 and 55 was thus enshrined in 169 IACHR, ”Indigenous and tribal peoples’ rights over their ancestral lands and natural resources – Norms and Jurisprudence of the Inter-American Human Rights System”, 2010. 170 “Special Protection for Indigenous Populations: Action to combat racism and racial discrimination”, 1972. Cited in: IACHR, Report No. 75/02, Case 11.140, Mary and Carrie Dann (United States), December 27, 2002, par. 126. 171 It has been proven that (i) on December 5, 1991, an “Agreement” was signed by the representatives of the indigenous communities and the General Director of Fiscal Lands Adjudications of the Province of Salta; (ii) this Agreement was later ratified in its entirety and formalized by the Governor of the Province through Decree 2609 of 1991, transcribed above; (iii) Decree 2609/91 was confirmed and convalidated through another provincial Decree, adopted on November 6, 1992; (iv) the implementation of the provisions of these agreements and decrees was subjected to the expertise of an Honorary Advisory Commission created by Decree No. 18 of January 13, 1993 of the Provincial Government; (v) the Honorary Advisory Commission eventually issued recommendations for implementation which were accepted by the indigenous communities; (vi) the report and recommendations presented by the Honorary Advisory Commission were formally approved by Decree 3097/95 of the Provincial Government; and (vii) in April, 1996 a new agreement was signed between the indigenous communities (represented by the Lhaka Honhat Association) and the Provincial Government, aimed at creating a Coordinating Unit for the implementation of these commitments.