are driven by different interests and objectives and that they need to find a common ground – one that follows domestic and international laws and best practices, gives equal weight to all the voices in the discussion and preserves IP lands and culture. Government for the people. The vast body of literature about the impact of ELCs on IP land rights and recent interviews with CSOs and IP groups confirm that the leading problem with regard to securing land tenure by indigenous communities is the lack of transparency in the granting of ELCs and lax enforcement of the existing laws and regulations. Until and unless these issues and the lack of political will to implement the legal provisions ensuring land rights of IPs are effectively addressed, the secure land tenure of IPs will be very difficult to achieve. Corporate capture of government at all levels. Another key issue that is intrinsically linked to the lack of enforcement of the current legal regime is the overwhelming problem of ‘corporate capture’ of the Cambodian government. It has been largely documented by CSOs and local media that the ruling political elite often has direct or indirect ties with companies that are interested in investing in “...the leading problem with regard to securing land tenure by indigenous communities is the lack of transparency in the granting of ELCs and lax enforcement of the existing laws and regulations.” 38 the land inhabited by IPs. In fact, government at all levels of the chain of command is involved in questionable but lucrative deals with companies applying for ELCs. This evident conflict of interest needs to be tackled and the government needs to introduce legislation regulating human rights impacts of companies on IPs and Cambodians in general. IP voice and leadership. In order for any meaningful change and advancement of indigenous peoples’ land rights to take place, the movement needs to be led by the IP communities themselves. The IPs need to be at the forefront of mobilization and advocacy efforts for their own rights and need appropriate platforms to voice their concerns. The IP voice needs to be present in policy considerations at all levels of government, from local through to national authorities. This requires up-scaling empowerment, education and awareness raising among IP communities. As Mr. Vuthy, one of the IRAM members pointed out: “one of the best ways to empower indigenous peoples is to make sure that they contribute their own financial resources to the community movement fund, so they can use it for various activities and take ownership in it.“ Another key factor needed for the IP movement to grow in strength is the improvement of networking among the IP communities themselves. This is elaborated on in more detail in the succeeding sections. Greater understanding of IP issues by all stakeholders. Members of relevant ministries, parliamentarians and government officials at local and provincial levels need to have a better understanding of international human rights laws, domestic legal provisions and procedures regarding IP land and resource rights. The same applies to companies, Khmer-speaking media and the general public. Without greater awareness Asian NGO Coalition for Agrarian Reform and Rural Development (ANGOC)