natural resources of African countries to the detriment of African peoples.76 The aftermath left Africa's people and natural resources still vulnerable. 190. Notwithstanding this interpretation originating from a specific context, the Commission has consistently held that this provision still applies to groups belonging to a State77 . Thus, it has indicated that the term "People" in this Article 21 can mean either any people of a given State or a "people" within that State" . It is therefore understandable that both categories of 'peoples' are entitled to the rights guaranteed under the provisions of Article 21 . 191. This view is also shared by the African Court. Indeed, regarding the question as to whether the enjoyment of the rights recognised to the peoples constituting the population of a given State can be extended to sub-state ethnic groups and communities which are part of that population, this Court has responded in the affirmative79. It does, however, set a condition that such groups must not challenge the sovereignty or territorial integrity of the State without the State's consent in the exercise of their rights. 192. Thus, governments have a duty to protect their citizens, not only by adopting appropriate legislation and effectively enforcing it, but also by protecting them from harmful activities that may be perpetrated by private actors (see Union des jeunes mfocats 1). Chad 12)**0. As emphasised by the African Court, this duty requires a positive obligation on the part of the State to act whenever the rights of the people under its protection are threatened; and this must be done in accordance with human rights instruments. 193. More specifically, the situation described and objected to in this case calls into question the criteria, conditions and objectives for the establishment of national parks. Indeed, the issue that arises is whether the establishment of a national park must necessarily be to the detriment of the primary occupying population. in other words, if the purpose of creating a park is to protect biodiversity for the good of all, should the way of life, culture and environment of the indigenous populations occupying it not be taken into account? 7° Communication 155/96 Social and Economic Rights Action Centre (SERAC)and Cenlrefor Economic and Social Rights (CESR) v. Nigeria (2001) ACHPR para 56 "idem, Paras 5657 "Communication 328/06 Front de libérotion de IEtat du Cabinda V. Republic of Angolo (2013) para 130 79 Application No. 006/2012, African Commission on Human and Peoples' Rights v. Republic of Kenya, para 198-199 "=;;§`.'. "Communication 155/96 - op. cit. para/.. S / ... ��m.~f= ii I Q.. . Q.. Q, *=@ . . *l .40 0 l, . .