law enforcement, or urge the county/city governments in question to respond to the misconduct proactively. As a result, misconduct persists, and is becoming increasingly serious. Upon investigation and subsequent follow-up by the Control Yuan, the Council of Indigenous Peoples is reinforcing the legislation with the draft Act Governing Recovery of Rights, Management and Utilization of Land Reserved for Indigenous Peoples. 8. The key reason behind the loss of reserved land caused by illegal transfer or subleasing is the failure to resolve indigenous peoples’ financial diffculties, which compel them to do so due to poverty. Notwithstanding, the Council of Indigenous Peoples has continued to ignore the situation, as it has provided no adequate alternative financial measures that could help indigenous peoples develop business on their own lands to satisfy their livelihoods. Upon investigation and subsequent follow-up by the Control Yuan, the Council of Indigenous Peoples has, since 2015, introduced the “Indigenous Peoples’ Lean Start Guidance Program” and the “Indigenous Peoples’ Comprehensive Development Fund Loan Power-Up Program,” in order to increase the funds to be made available to indigenous peoples wishing to start or engage in any business. 9. For the dispute over the reserved land involving Techi Reservoir and the Highland Experimental Farm operated by National Taiwan University, please refer to the Future Prospects chapter (Points 256 and 257). Pingpu Indigenous Peoples Identity Movement 10. The Pingpu Indigenous Peoples Identity Movement has been seeking to achieve official recognition of Pingpu tribal identity for almost three decades. However, it has so far received no attention or recognition from the Government. According to Point 33 of the Concluding Observations and Recommendations adopted by the International Review Committee for the Review of the Second Report, dated March 1, 2013, “It has come to the attention of experts that the nine Pingpu lowland aboriginal tribes have failed to be granted recognition as indigenous peoples by the Government of Taiwan despite evidence of their distinct history and culture, language, customs, and traditions.” Point 34 of the same document states that “Experts recommend that the government should clarify its policy of identifying indigenous peoples, based on international human rights standards set out in the two Covenants as well as in the UN Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples, and the ILO Convention No. 169 on indigenous and tribal peoples, and to apply a human rights-based approach in its engagement with the various indigenous groups in the country.” In order to properly pursue equality in human rights, national self-determination, and respect for diversity, culture, and language in Taiwan, no Pingpu peoples should be left behind as the nation pursues transitional justice. The Government should respond to these issues more proactively. 8