71 k) the members of the Community “occupy and utilize a substantial part of the area of the concession”. The concession granted to the SOLCARSA corporation endangered the economic interests, survival, and cultural integrity of the Community and its members. “[T]he logging operations of SOLCARSA […], on lands used and occupied by the Awas Tingni Community, specifically, may have damaged thus Community’s forests”. The concession and the actions of the State in connection with it are a violation of the right to property; l) the complexity of the matter is no excuse for the State not to fulfill its obligations, nor for it to manage the untitled indigenous lands as if they were State lands; m) article 181 of the Constitution of Nicaragua refers to the approval of concessions by the State to lands belonging to the State, not to the utilization of resources on communal lands. That article does not authorize MARENA and the Regional Council of the RAAN to authorize logging on private or communal lands without the owner’s authorization; n) the State must adopt appropriate measures for demarcation of the property of the Community and to fully guarantee the Community’s rights to its lands and resources; ñ) in the instant case, the American Convention must be interpreted including the principles pertaining to collective rights of indigenous peoples, pursuant to article 29 of the Convention; and o) the granting of the concession to SOLCARSA and omission by the State in not adopting measures to guarantee the rights of the Awas Tingni Community to the land and the natural resources, according to its traditional land use and occupation patterns, was a violation of articles 1 and 2 of the Convention. Arguments of the State 141. Regarding article 21 of the Convention, the State alleged that: a) there are “particularistic circumstances which place this claim outside the normal scope of indigenist law”. The Community is a small group of indigenous people which resulted from a communal separation and successive geographic shifts; their presence in the region has not been sufficiently documented; they possess lands which are not ancestral and on part of which title has been obtained by other indigenous communities, or other communities claim that they have ancestral possession rights predating the alleged right of Awas Tingni. Land claims by various ethnic groups have led to the existence of complex conflicting interests, which require careful analysis by national authorities and a delicate process of solution of those conflicts to generate legal certainty. The Community recognized that its population includes persons coming from the Tilba-Lupia indigenous community, which received title deed from the State; b) Law No. 14, known as the “Amendment to the Agrarian Reform Law” established a legal framework to conduct indigenous communal land titling. Under that law, “numerous indigenous communal land titlings took place”.