A/HRC/15/35 agreement or achieve consent. This qualitative requirement is closely and inherently linked to the requirement that consultations be carried out in good faith. 25. Finally, the ILO supervisory bodies have established that there should be a periodic evaluation of the effectiveness of existing consultation procedures or mechanisms between States and indigenous peoples, with the participation of the indigenous peoples concerned, with a view to continuing to improve the effectiveness of such procedures or mechanisms. 26. In addition to these standards, Convention No. 169 contains a number of other provisions affirming the right to participation of indigenous peoples: (a) The right to participation (art. 2, 5–7, 15, 22, 23); (b) The right to be consulted (art. 6, 15, 17, 22, 27, 28); (c) 27, 33); (d) The State obligation to cooperate with indigenous peoples (art. 7, 20, 22, 25, The right of indigenous peoples to decide their own priorities (art. 7); (e) The obligation to refrain from taking measures contrary to the freely expressed wishes of indigenous peoples (art. 4); (f) The obligation to seek agreement or consent from indigenous peoples (art. 6); (g) (art. 16); The obligation to seek free and informed consent from indigenous peoples (h) The right of indigenous peoples to exercise control over their own development (art. 7); (i) B. The right of indigenous peoples to effective representation (art. 6 and 16). Regional instruments and jurisprudence 27. Regional systems have also contributed significantly to a fuller understanding of the content of the right of indigenous peoples to participate in decision-making. In the InterAmerican regional human rights system, a draft American declaration on the rights of indigenous peoples is currently being debated.16 The American Convention on Human Rights generally sets forth only individual rights and does not directly address the corresponding rights of indigenous peoples. Nevertheless, the lack of specific indigenous provisions has not prevented the Inter-American Court of Human Rights and the InterAmerican Commission on Human Rights from developing significant case law on the rights of indigenous peoples, which have particular relevance to the right to participation in decision-making. 28. Of particular importance regarding the right to political participation is the case of Yatama v. Nicaragua. The Inter-American Court held that the electoral law of Nicaragua constituted a disproportionate restriction on the political rights of the candidates of an indigenous and ethnic party because the State requirements for participation in the municipal elections required a form of organization that was foreign to the customs and traditions of the people.17 29. The African Charter on Human and Peoples’ Rights specifically refers to both the rights of individuals and the rights of peoples, and provides for the right of all citizens to 16 17 8 Available at www.oas.org/OASpage/Events/default_ENG.asp?eve_code=11 (accessed 6 May 2010). Yatama v. Nicaragua, Series C (No. 127), 2005.