make this unviable; (ii) the indigenous peoples did not possess the capacity to take on the management of the reserves (supra para. 120); (iii) the restitution of the reserves was not possible because this would introduce changes in the population balance and would create a precedent for other indigenous and tribal groups who lived in nature reserves; also, the State had environmental obligations in both the domestic sphere towards its citizens, and in the international sphere based on international environmental treaties, such as the Convention on Biological Diversity; (iv) regarding the possibility of expropriating third parties, this would result in ethnic and racial turmoil, have unforeseen consequence for the lives of those who were obliged to abandon these territories, and entail economic prejudice at the local and State levels,319 and (v) the State could not share the control of its resources, because 85% of the Suriname’s economy was dependent on natural resources320 and, therefore, it must control them totally in order to provide for all its citizens and “to sustain the economy as the main driver for developing the nation.” 278. In Chapters VI-I and VI-II, the Court determined that the State had violated Article 3, 21 and 23 of the American Convention, in relation to Articles 1(1) and 2 of this instrument, to the detriment of the Kaliña and Lokono peoples, for various reasons: (a) the failure to recognize collective juridical personality; (b) the failure to recognize and guarantee indigenous communal property by failing to delimit, demarcate, grant title to, and guarantee use and enjoyment, as well as the adverse impacts resulting from the issue of titles to third parties, and due to different types of damage in the reserves, and (c) the lack of effective participation in relation to the exploitation project within one reserve (supra paras. 114, 142, 160, 198 and 230). 279. The Court establishes that, in order to achieve integral reparation of the violations that have been proved by the restitution of the rights that have been violated, the State must adopt the following measures: i) Juridical personality and collective property a) Grant the Kaliña and Lokono peoples legal recognition of the collective juridical personality corresponding to the community of which they are members in order to ensure them the exercise and full enjoyment of their right to property of a communal nature, as well as access to justice as a community in keeping with their customs and traditions, as established in paragraphs 105 to 114. The State must comply with the measure of reparation within 18 months of notification of this Judgment, and b) Delimit, demarcate, and grant collective title to the territory of the members of the Kaliña and Lokono peoples, guaranteeing the use and effective enjoyment, as established in paragraphs 129 to 142 of the Judgment, and by means of processes in which these peoples participate. This should be carried out taking into account the rights of other tribal peoples in the area. 280. In the case of the lands claimed that are in the hands of non-indigenous or non-tribal third parties, whether natural or legal persons, the State must, through its competent authorities, decide whether to purchase or expropriate the territory in favor of the indigenous 319 The State indicated that it would have to provide financial compensation to the third parties who were expropriated, and the cost would be too great. It would also have consequences for the local economy, because, as the area was near the border with French Guiana, many economic activities involved trade and the provision of services and these would be negatively affected by the restriction of certain facilities. 320 In particular, in 2013, bauxite represented 15% of the State’s total earnings. 72