A/HRC/36/58 260. The European Union requested the deletion of “individually or collectively” from paragraph 2. Switzerland noted repetitions in paragraph 1 of issues raised in articles 19 (2) and 20 (2). 261. Ecuador and Venezuela (Bolivarian Republic of) supported the article and stated that groups other than indigenous people had distinct cultures, adding that culture was essentially collective. 262. Several civil society organizations expressed their support for the article. The definition of traditional knowledge of indigenous and local communities being discussed by the World Intellectual Property Organization was mentioned. 4. Article 27 263. The European Union said it would like to avoid extrapolating rights set out in the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples and suggested deleting the last sentence of paragraph 1. Guatemala supported that comment and requested clarification of the meaning of “ways and means”. 264. Ecuador said that the language on the participation of peasants should remain. 265. Representatives of several civil society organizations stressed the importance of participation and international cooperation for the implementation of the rights in the declaration 266. La Via Campesina (Indonesia) suggested adding a paragraph on monitoring and reporting and emphasized that traditional knowledge should be recognized as a human right. 5. Preamble 267. The European Union recommended that “people” be replaced with “persons” throughout the preamble, to which Centre Europe—Tiers Monde objected. 268. Guatemala noted that many of the preambular paragraphs dealt with issues about which Guatemala was concerned, such as those also raised in articles 1-2, 15, 17 and 19, and that it therefore reserved its positions on those preambular paragraphs thereon. 269. Colombia expressed concern about the fact that the preamble touched upon subjects outside the mandate of the Human Rights Council, such as the environment and climate change. It also expressed concern about the fact that there were concepts in the text whose definitions had not been accepted, such as “Mother Earth”. 270. South Africa suggested including a reference to the justiciability of economic, social and cultural rights in the preamble. 271. ILO and La Via Campesina suggested adding a preambular paragraph on young people. 272. The European Union suggested replacing “wishing” with “acknowledging” in the first preambular paragraph. ILO recommended adding to that same paragraph a reference to its Declaration on Fundamental Principles and Rights at Work and its Declaration on Social Justice for a Fair Globalization. 273. Switzerland recommended placing the reference to the International Treaty on Plant Genetic Resources for Food and Agriculture and the twenty-second preambular paragraph higher up in the text, for example after the second preambular paragraph, and that language from the third preambular paragraph of the Treaty be used. Switzerland also recommended that the preamble include a reference to language from article 9 (2) of the Treaty. 274. Guatemala objected to the mention of “territory” in the third preambular paragraph. 275. Switzerland proposed using the following wording in the fourth preambular paragraph: “to sustainable development and in protecting and managing water and conserving soil and biodiversity”. 21