domestic law. 85. Malawi African Association and Others v. Mauritania, African Commission on Human and Peoples' Rights, Comm. Nos. 54/91, 61/91, 98/93, 164/97 à 196/97 and 210/98 (2000), para. 128. See also communications 54/91 th et al v Mauritania , 13 Activity Report, para. 128.[sic] 86. The Ogoni Case (2001), para. 54. th 87. Communication No. 225/98 v Nigeria, 14 Annual Report, para. 52. 88. See Dogan and Others v. Turkey, European Court of Human Rights, applications 8803-8811/02, 8813/02 and 8815-8819/02 (2004),para. 138-139 . 89. See Report of the African Commission’s Working Group of Experts, Submitted in accordance with the “Resolution on the Rights of Indigenous Populations/Communities in Africa”, Adopted by the African th Commission on Human and Peoples’ Rights at its 28 Ordinary Session (2005). 90. Dogan and Others v. Turkey, European Court of Human Rights, Applications 8803-8811/02, 8813/02 and 8815-8819/02[/i] (2004), paras. 138-139. 91. [rul= Do?an and Others v. Turkey] http://www.unhcr.org/refworld/category,LEGAL,ECHR,,TUR,4c04d8cb2,0.htmlaccessed 27.10.2010[/popup],, European Court of Human Rights, Applications 8803-8811/02, 8813/02 and 88158819/02 (2004), para. 138-139. 92. The Awas Tingni Case (2001) , paras. 140(b) and 151 . 93. communications 54/91, 61/91, 98/93, 164/97, 196/97 and 210/98 94. African Commission on Human and Peoples’ Rights, Decision 155/96, The Social and Economic Rights th Action Centre and the Centre for Economic and Social Rights – Nigeria (27 May 2002), Fifteenth Annual Activity st Report of the African Commission on Human and Peoples’ Rights, 2001-2002, done at the 31 Ordinary Session of the African Commission held from 2 to 16 May 2002 in Pretoria, South Africa. 95. , Decision 155/96, The Social and Economic Rights Action Centre and the Centre for Economic and Social Rights – Nigeria (27 May 2002) (citing Committee on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, General Comment No. 7, The right to adequate housing (Art. 11 (1) of the Covenant): forced evictions, para. 4, U.N. Doc. E/C.12/1997/4 (1997)). 96. Inter-American Court of Human Rights, Case of the Saramaka People v Suriname. (Judgment of th 28 November 2007). 97. Inter-American Court of Human Rights, ttp://www.corteidh.or.cr/docs/casos/articulos/seriec_172_ing.pdf]popup= Case of the Saramaka People v th Suriname(Judgment of 28 November 2007). 98. Op. cit , paras 11 and 12 .. 99. See ECHR, [url=http://cmiskp.echr.coe.int/tkp197/view.asp?item=3&portal=hbkm&action=html&sessionid=62576262]Connors v. The United Kingdom][url] (declaring that States have an obligation to take positive steps to provide for and protect the different lifestyles of minorities as a way of providing equality under the law). See also IACmHR Report on the Situation of Human Rights in Ecuador, (stating that “within international law generally, and Inter-American law specifically, special protections for indigenous peoples may be required for them to exercise their rights fully and equally with the rest of the population. Additionally, special protections for indigenous peoples may be required to ensure their physical and cultural survival - a right protected in a range of international instruments and conventions”). See also U.N. International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination, Art. 1.4 (stating that “[s]pecial measures taken for the sole purpose of securing adequate advancement of certain racial or ethnic groups or individuals requiring such protection as may be necessary in order to ensure such groups or individuals equal enjoyment or exercise of human rights and fundamental freedoms shall not be deemed racial discrimination”), and UNCERD, General Recommendation No. 23, Rights of indigenous peoples,para. 4 (calling upon States to take certain measures in order to recognise and ensure the rights of indigenous peoples). th 100. Indigenous Community Yakye Axa v. Paraguay 17 June 2005, Inter American Court of Human Rights.[/i] 101. Case of the Sawhoyamaxa Indigenous Community v. Paraguay Judgment of 29 March 2006 Inter-American Court of Human Rights. 102. See The Mayagna Awas Tingni v. Nicaragua, Inter-American Court of Human Rights, (2001) hereinafter the Awas Tingni Case 2001. 103. Committee on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, General Comment 4, The right to adequate housing (Sixth session, 1991),para. 18 , U.N. Doc. E/1992/23, annex III at 114 (1991), reprinted in Compilation of General Comments and General Recommendations Adopted by Human Rights Treaty Bodies, U.N. Doc. HRI/GEN/1/Rev.6 at 18 (2003). 104. See Commission on Human Rights resolution 1993/77 UN Doc. E/C.4/RES/1993/77 (1993); Commission on Human Rights Resolution 2004/28, UN Doc. E/C.4/RES/2004/28 (2004). 105. See Committee on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, General Comment 7, Forced evictions, and the right to adequate housing (Sixteenth session, 1997), para. 14, U.N. Doc. E/1998/22, annex IV at 113 (1998), reprinted in Compilation of General Comments and General Recommendations Adopted by Human Rights Treaty Bodies, U.N. Doc. HRI/GEN/1/Rev.6 at 45 (2003). 106. Protocol to the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms, Art. 1 , 213 U.N.T.S. 262, entered into force 18 May 1954. 107. See 3.2.0 of the Respondent State Brief on the Merits. See also para 178 of this judgment where the Respondent State argues that the community’s rights of access is not extinguished.