A/HRC/39/67 text which was in line with other agreed language contained in the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples, the Declaration on the Rights of Persons Belonging to National or Ethnic, Religious and Linguistic Minorities and other instruments. No other delegations raised concerns about this article. Article 28. General 86. The Chair introduced article 28 as a new article, following comments to earlier versions of the draft declaration. Many delegations welcomed article 28. Some made language suggestions for the text. Another delegation called for explicit text, whereby the declaration would be subject to domestic law. One delegation supported the current version of the paragraph, while suggesting edits. Another delegation raised questions about the methods of work, which were seconded by other delegations calling for more time to consider the suggestions made, The Chair referred to the five-year-long process leading to the current text of the draft declaration, which had followed the same methodology, and recalled that the present draft had been made available in February 2018. The experts observed that article 28 was based on similar articles from human rights instruments, following agreed language from the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples and questioned the rationale for the reference to national law suggested by one delegation. Collective rights 87. The fifth session of the Working Group also benefited from a specific discussion on collective rights which took place in the afternoon of 12 April. Some delegations expressed their opposition to collective rights and to the creation of new human rights in the declaration. One delegation took the opportunity of the debate to give a general statement expressing its concern over collective rights. Another delegation expressed its concern that some of the rights in the declaration had not been recognized. Other delegations stated that collective rights did not weaken individual rights. On the contrary, they reinforced and complemented them, as had been widely recognized at the international, regional and national levels. 88. One delegation pointed out that the subject of rights was the individual and in the context of the draft declaration the rights holder was the individual peasant. However, there were human rights with collective dimensions and some rights could be asserted collectively. The delegation believed that by looking at each article, it was possible to find language that would be acceptable to all. Two delegations stated that collective rights had been well established and urged other delegations to engage in constructive dialogue. One delegation emphasized that individual rights could not be exercised fully if they did not have the collective component. Some communities could not flourish if they were not granted those collective rights. 89. The experts provided extensive examples of international, regional and national legislation supporting the concept of collective rights. 90. Many civil society representatives took the floor to argue for collective rights and stated that they were recognized in many international, regional and national instruments. Civil society organizations explained that these were not new rights and were not in conflict with individual rights. Testimonies were shared on how and why this concept would be core to the declaration and essential for the protection of the rights of peasants and other people working in rural areas. VI. Concluding remarks 91. At the ninth and final meeting of the fifth session of the working group, delegations and civil society organizations took the floor and thanked the Chair for the open and constructive debate throughout the session and expressed the hope that this important declaration would be adopted in a timely manner. One delegation stressed that divergent views on the content of the declaration still persisted, reiterated its position against the 16