indigenous community shall be essential for its settlement in areas other than its habitual territories, except for reasons of national security. Article 15. When, in the cases foreseen in the preceding article, the transfer of one or more indigenous communities becomes essential, they shall be provided with suitable lands, of at least the same area as those they occupied, and shall be appropriately compensated for the damage suffered owing to the displacement and for the value of the improvements. 10. Meanwhile, article 22 of the said Law 904 establishes the procedure for the settlement of indigenous communities on public lands, and articles 24 and 25 establish the procedures for their settlement on privately-owned lands, occupied by the indigenous peoples. Article 26 of the law establishes that: “In cases of expropriation, the procedure and the compensation shall be adapted to the provisions of the Constitution and law, and for the payment of compensation, the necessary resources shall be included in the General Budget of the Nation.” 11. Law 43/89 establishes a regime for the regularization of the indigenous community settlements. Its article 4 stipulates: “During the administrative and legal procedures established in article 2, the Paraguayan Indigenous Peoples Institute (INDI) and the Rural Welfare Institute (IBR) shall propose definitive solutions for the settlement of the indigenous communities, pursuant to Law 854/63, Agrarian Statute, and Law 904/81, Indigenous Communities Statute, proposing expropriation, pursuant to article 1 of Law 1372/88, when no solution is achieved by other means.” 2 12. In the absence of a formal agreement with the owner, the provisions of both Law 904 and Law 43/89 establish expropriation as the way to regularize the settlements of the indigenous communities established on private land. These provisions are consistent with the norms of the Civil Code, which establish that the ownership of property is lost based on: (a) transfer of title; (b) judicial transfer or declaration (c) execution of judgment; (d) expropriation, and (e) its abandonment declared in a public deed, duly registered with the Property Registry, and in the other cases established by law (article 1967). Also article 1966 lists specifically the ways to accede to the ownership of property: (a) contract; (b) accession, (c) usucaptio, and (d) inheritance. 13. On this point, the contradiction between the constitutional provision and article 64 of Law 1863/02 should be noted. While the latter limits the possibilities of expropriation to property that is not exploited rationally, article 109 of the Constitution, the supreme law of the Republic, stipulates that, in the case of the expropriation of large unproductive estates earmarked for agrarian reform, the law itself establishes the amount of the compensation while, in other cases, this amount is established contractually or by judicial decision. The Constitutional Chamber of the Supreme Court has developed case law affirming that, for the expropriation to be admissible, it suffices that the legislator believes that there is a social interest or need, or reasons of public interest, and that they can be remedied with the expropriation of specific properties. 14. On these grounds, I dissent from the judgment when it declares that the State violated the right to property established in Article 21 of the Convention to the detriment of the Xákmok Kásek Community of the Enxet-Language people. The 2 Law 854/63 was derogated by Law 1863/02. 3