A/HRC/33/56 84. Several members of the Expert Mechanism emphasized the importance of ensuring that indigenous human rights defenders received adequate protection and that their freedom of expression, freedom of assembly and other rights were fully respected. In that regard, they expressed concerns about the situation of Jannie Lasimbang, a former Chair of the Expert Mechanism, who was currently being prosecuted for her role in organizing peaceful assemblies. X. Follow-up to thematic studies and advice 85. Mr. Tsykarev introduced the agenda item on follow-up to thematic studies and advice by recalling the Expert Mechanism’s mandate and listing the studies and advice previously issued by the Expert Mechanism. The studies and advice were meant to provide a better understanding of the provisions of the Declaration and to propose concrete actions that States, indigenous peoples, civil society, international organizations, national human rights institutions and others could take in order to further its implementation. The studies of the Expert Mechanism placed special emphasis on the participation of indigenous peoples themselves in decisions that affected them. 86. He also shared some examples of how the Expert Mechanism was moving forward on issues relating to previous studies. In the study on cultural heritage, the Expert Mechanism had underscored the need for Member States, museums and other collecting entities and international organizations to work together to enable repatriation of cultural items and ceremonial objects of indigenous peoples. The Permanent Forum at its fifteenth session had made two specific recommendations regarding repatriation. One recommendation was directed to United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO) and the Expert Mechanism, suggesting they co-host an expert seminar regarding the establishment of a mechanism or an instrument for repatriation of such objects. 87. He also called on States to ensure continued implementation of best practices that had been referenced in previous studies of the Expert Mechanism. As an example, he mentioned the Assembly of Indigenous Peoples of the North in the parliament of KhantyMansiysky autonomous region of the Russian Federation, referred to in the study on indigenous peoples and the right to participate in decision-making (A/HRC/18/42), noting that there had been developments that could weaken that good practice significantly. 88. The ensuing discussion focused mostly on the Expert Mechanism’s studies on access to justice and cultural heritage. With regard to access to justice, participants highlighted that representation of indigenous peoples in prison systems remained high in several countries and conditions of imprisonment often violated human rights. Participants called for improved juridical systems and legal assistance as a prerequisite to ensuring access to justice. They also emphasized the need to decriminalize the work of indigenous human rights defenders. In terms of cultural heritage, several participants expressed concerns regarding the vitality of their languages and the importance of indigenous languages being taught in schools. Chief Littlechild expressed concerns over violations of spiritual rights when sacred ceremonies as part of cultural heritage were impacted. He also indicated that the Maskwacis Cree had recently declared Cree as the official language in their territories. 89. Participants discussed issues relating to participation, such as low representation in national and local governments, as well as education, including continued discrimination against indigenous peoples in public education systems. Although few good practices were discussed, indigenous representatives noted that the Expert Mechanism’s recommendations were very useful, because they broadened understanding of the articles of the Declaration. 19