A/HRC/15/35 countries where traditional leaders are now appointed by the government to represent the community and, in some cases, by companies that have an interest in influencing the affairs of a particular community.35 Changes in traditional leadership and representation in this manner have a significant negative impact on the internal decision-making systems of indigenous peoples. 50. Where traditional leaders have been put in place by mainstream authorities, resources are often not made available to support these “new” traditional leaders. Moreover, not enough training and exposure is given to appointed community leaders to ensure that legal and administrative decision-making processes result in quality judgements and decisions. Consequently, many indigenous peoples have lost confidence in, or mistrust, their own decision-making institutions. Collective reflections by indigenous communities to revitalize and regain the respect of decision-making processes and institutions are also lacking. Such efforts would represent a major undertaking and require multiple levels of intervention, including promoting respect for capable indigenous institutions, asserting the right to internal decision-making, and advocating for recognition of indigenous customary institutions. 51. Many indigenous peoples continue to utilize, have access to and develop traditional decision-making structures for internal purposes, notwithstanding the lack of formal recognition of these institutions by the State. Some indigenous peoples, nations and communities also prefer to remain unrecognized, and forgo the funding, services, programmes and legal protections that come with recognition in order to maintain full control and independence over their structures.36 C. Indigenous parliaments and organizations 52. Some contemporary indigenous decision-making institutions take the form of indigenous parliaments and organizations. These institutions are modelled on traditional decision-making institutions, comprising leaders selected by the people they aim to represent, and are often guided by statutes and adopt functions that promote the integrity and well-being of their constituency or community. 53. The Sami Parliaments provide a clear example of an indigenous parliament; the indigenous governance in Kuna Yala represents another kind of institution.37 54. Many indigenous peoples and communities have now established organizations at the local, national, regional and international levels to facilitate decision-making internally, and also to engage with the State on various matters. D. Indigenous legal systems 55. Indigenous legal systems, which include legislative (indigenous laws), judicial and procedural aspects, are critical to internal decision-making. The judicial and procedural aspects include rulings of indigenous courts by the chiefs and councils of elders when 35 36 37 14 Submission by AIPP. See also E/C.19/2010/6. These include the sovereign independent Seminole Nation of Florida and the Western Shoshone National Council, United States of America. The Kuna Yula is an autonomous territory, or comarca, in Panama, inhabited by the Kuna indigenous people. The name means “Kuna-land” or “Kuna mountain” in the Kuna language. See Vicente Cabedo Mallol, Constitucionalismo y Derecho Indígena en América Latina (Valencia, Polytechnic University of Valencia Press, Collección Amadis), pp. 243–247.