A/HRC/39/67 such as the Convention on Biological Diversity, since they called on benefits to be shared equally. Article 20. Right to biological diversity 77. There were no major objections to the content of article 20, however some delegations suggested concrete language. One delegation proposed that the title be changed to “Biological diversity”, deleting “Right to”. Other concrete language suggestions were also made and are reflected in annex III. One delegation expressed support for article 20 and suggested that the affirmation of the right to biological diversity should go hand in hand with an emphasis on the obligations of peasants to preserve biodiversity. The same delegation further suggested that consistent use of terminology with regard to traditional knowledge be ensured, as it appears in a number of other articles. Another delegation supported the protection of knowledge and suggested that indigenous and traditional food crops be included. Another delegation underscored the role of peasants in maintaining, conserving and renewing the environment as central to the discussion. One delegation called for consistency in the use of language on traditional knowledge, particularly in regard to paragraph 1. Finally, a number of delegations called for the article to be preserved as it stood. 78. Experts and civil society representatives advocated for preserving the reference to the right to biological diversity. One expert also suggested including a new paragraph in line with the content of former article 26 (4) in the previous text, which was considered at the fourth session of the working group. He called on States to take measures to ensure that the prior informed consent or approval and involvement of peasants and other people working in rural areas was obtained for access to genetic resources where they had the established right to grant access to such resources. Civil society organizations endorsed the draft article in its entirety and urged States to protect small-scale fisherfolk who had maintained their practice without disrupting the ecosystem but were now increasingly being marginalized and dispossessed because of industrial fishing. Another civil society representative cautioned against incorporating a proposal on imposing obligations on peasants and suggested that consensual language be found that would encourage peasants to comply with their responsibilities. Article 21. Rights to water and sanitation 79. There were no major objections to the content of article 21. There was some discussion on the issue of prioritization of water. Many participants stated that the simple “access” to water for work was not enough as peasants could not compete with transnational corporations and big farm holders. One delegation spoke against creating new specific rights for peasants and made language proposals, which are reflected in annex III. One delegation called for the insertion of references to the right to sanitation next to the right to water, in order to prevent the pollution of water. Another delegation highlighted the importance of water, particularly to peasant farmers and fisherfolk, and called for free, nondiscriminatory and quality access. Experts reiterated the fundamental nature of this right and that the right to water and sanitation is well recognized in international human rights law. Experts also made reference to several international instruments that recognized the importance of irrigation for the right to food. They also highlighted the situation of women, who are particularly affected. One expert endorsed the title of the article, with its focus on the right to water and not water management. Civil society organizations supported the article as it stood and stated that, although peasants had the right to access, in practice they were denied those rights. Article 22. Right to social security 80. During the discussion on article 22, delegations argued that the right to social security depended on the person’s legal status and in that context they submitted concrete language proposals. Other delegations called for the maintenance of article 22 in its 14