A/HRC/34/49 Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples for non-indigenous communities that have similarly close relationships with their ancestral territories, States nevertheless have heightened obligations to protect people in these situations from the adverse effects of exploitation of natural resources. These protections arise from multiple sources, including the general obligation of States to respect and protect the human rights of members of these communities, taking into account that their close relationship with nature makes their ability to enjoy these rights especially vulnerable to environmentally harmful actions. Among other obligations, States therefore have heightened duties to ensure that they are able to enjoy the rights to information, participation, freedom of expression and association, and effective remedies in relation to actions that may adversely affect their relationship with the ecosystems on which they depend, as well as substantive rights to protection of the ecosystems themselves. 53. Non-indigenous as well as indigenous persons may also be owed heightened obligations because of their status as members of minorities. Article 27 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights provides that “persons belonging to [ethnic, religious or linguistic] minorities shall not be denied the right, in community with the other members of their group, to enjoy their own culture, to profess and practise their own religion, or to use their own language”. The Human Rights Committee has stated that “culture manifests itself in many forms, including a particular way of life associated with the use of land resources, especially in the case of indigenous peoples”, and that the enjoyment of rights to traditional activities, such as hunting and fishing, may require “positive legal measures of protection and measures to ensure the effective participation of members of minority communities in decisions which affect them.”72 54. The Human Rights Committee has made clear that States may not promote their economic development at the expense of the rights protected by article 27 of the Covenant. Whether measures that substantially interfere with the culturally significant economic activities of a minority community are acceptable depends on whether the members of the community were able to participate in the decision-making process that resulted in the measures and whether they will continue to benefit from their traditional economy. The Committee has stated that “participation in the decision-making process must be effective, which requires not mere consultation but the free, prior and informed consent of the members of the community. In addition, the measures must respect the principle of proportionality so as not to endanger the very survival of the community and its members”.73 55. Protections for non-indigenous as well as indigenous people may also arise from the principle of non-discrimination, which is recognized in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (art. 2) and throughout human rights law. States are required to ensure that measures, including measures that may appear non-discriminatory on their face, do not have disproportionate impacts on the enjoyment of human rights on prohibited grounds, including race and ethnicity.74 Because measures that adversely affect ecosystems may well have disproportionately severe effects on the enjoyment of human rights of members of marginalized ethnic groups who rely directly on the ecosystems, States have heightened 72 73 74 consideration is whether the people themselves self-identify as indigenous. See the ILO Indigenous and Tribal Peoples Convention, 1989 (No. 169), art. 1. General comment No. 23 (1994) on the rights of minorities, para. 7. See communication No. 1457/2006, Poma Poma v. Peru, Views adopted on 27 March 2009, paras. 7.3-7.6. Committee on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, general comment No. 20 (2009) on nondiscrimination in economic, social and cultural rights, para. 10. 17