A/HRC/24/36 first session of the Human Rights Council.5 The aim of the report, which followed the 2004 and 2007 reports of previous mandate holders on this theme, was to improve awareness about the lack of compliance with the legal and policy framework governing the granting and management of land concessions, information on the use of protected areas (location, size, use), and the lack of evidence of economic benefits of land concessions for the majority of Cambodians. 55. Since the presentation of the Special Rapporteur’s 2012 report on economic and other land concessions, the Ministry of Land Management has made progress in attempting to address long-standing land disputes and improve tenure security for families living on and around land concessions by devoting human and financial resources to measuring land and providing titles. There was little progress, however, on developing an improved system for the granting, management, reporting and cataloguing of economic and other land concessions with the Ministry of Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries and other ministries, and the issues of access to information and transparency highlighted in the report of the Special Rapporteur remain of concern. 56. Despite the progress in registering land in rural areas under the Prime Minister’s initiative, there were a number of concerns with this process as well. Foremost of concern is the connection reportedly drawn by authorities in a coercive fashion between the provision of land titles and the outcome of the elections. In addition, it is not clear, for example, why some land is being measured and other areas excluded. This resulted in a number of communities making appeals to the Prime Minister directly. For example, communities’ land associated with the sugar plantations, which benefit from the European preferential trade agreement (Everything But Arms) in Koh Kong, Oddar Meanchey and Kampong Speu provinces, have reportedly not yet had their land measured. In addition, NGOs, which often fill a gap in explaining rights and procedures to communities, were barred from monitoring the process, contributing to confusion in some cases. In addition, there have been reports of encroachment by concessionaires of land already in the process of titling, for example by the Pheapimex Company in Pursat province and the Kao Su Ea Lev rubber company in Ratanakiri province (involving Jarai indigenous peoples). In some cases disputes have been violent, such as involving a clash between representatives of the DM Group rubber plantation and the military in Ratanakiri province, which resulted in multiple injuries to community members. 57. It appears that the Government, at least in the short-term, is only making slow progress in implementing the well-developed domestic legal framework which recognizes indigenous peoples’ right to collective land title. At least in the short-term, it seemed that the indigenous land titling programmes were being deprioritized, and resources diverted from the Ministry of Land Management, Urban Planning and Construction. There have been reports of intimidation, harassment and coercion of indigenous peoples in some cases, and in other cases confusion among some indigenous individuals who opted for private land title without fully understanding their rights to communal land title. Affected villages include those of the Suoy peoples in Kampong Speu province, the Jarai, Tumpoun, Krung and Kachak peoples in Ratanakiri province, the Phnong and Stieng peoples in Mondulkiri, and the Kuy people in Preah Vihear. 58. In another case of concern regarding the construction of a dam by Hydropower Lower Sesan 2 Company Ltd. (of the Royal Group of Cambodia in partnership with China’s Hydrolancang International Energy Co. Ltd. and Viet Nam’s EVN International Joint Stock Company), there are reportedly inadequacies regarding consultation on the 5 16 “A human rights analysis of economic and other land concessions in Cambodia” (A/HRC/21/63/Add.1/Rev.1 of 11 October 2012).