As the green transition gains importance, the demand for green technologies and rare earth elements (REE)has surged. The Nordic countries are overall well-supplied with minerals and metals, however, they have a ratherunique dilemma. Knowing that the majority of Swedish mines are situated on Sápmi, a relevant question is raised:How do we extract mineral resources to benefit the green transition, whilst respecting the land of Europe's onlyIndigenous group, the Sami people? Moreover, as the CSDDD framework emerges, yet another question is raised:How might CSDDD promote Sami influence in future mining-related decision-making? To explore this matter, I haveconstructed a most likely scenario and used the recent REE findings in Kiruna as a case study. The framework seemsto promote Sami influence in numerous ways as it creates a new legal ground to demand participation and seek justice,expands the definition of Sami interests, allows for consultations with nearby Sami villages, includes the Samiperspective on negative impacts, and could result in Sami people being consulted in terms of Indigenous rights-holders.However, if the framework and the Swedish mining permitting system are not synchronized properly, it might resultin cases where mining companies receive permits that conflict the will of the Sami people. Furthermore, theframework’s mentions of stakeholder engagement and Indigenous participation leave room for interpretation. At worst,the level of Sami influence in future mining-related decision-making could lie in the hands of the member states, andhence, the mining companies.

The oppression that indigenous people experienced in many decades slowly began to loosen after the second world war, this is partly visible in the growing number of international convention protecting indigenous people. The racism and discrimination towards the indigenous people were exchanged with an aim to mediate a respectful and informative view of the history about the indigenous people to the majority. The Sami people’s history, the indigenous people of Norway, Sweden, Russia and Finland, is a European example of colonial oppression inside the boundaries of Europe. This essay aim to analyze how the Samis are represented in the Swedish curriculum from 1994 and 2011 and the Norwegian curriculum from 1997 and 2015. The analyze is concentrated to the subjects Religious Education and History. The theory of the analyze is based on postcolonial theory presented by Ania Loomba which make it possible to critically examine the curriculums.

Syftet med detta arbete är att, dels ur ett fastighetsrättsligt perspektiv, dels ett folkrättsligt perspektiv, utreda om Sveriges urbefolkning samerna kan sägas ha förvärvat en äganderätt till marken i Lappland enligt svensk rätt, eller om detta enbart handlar om en bruksrätt inkluderande renskötsel, jakt och fiske. Vad gäller det fastighetsrättsliga perspektivet har samerna haft en mycket stark fastighetsrättslig ställning på 1600- och 1700-talet. Då behandlades samernas lappskatteland som sådan skattejord, som skattebönderna sedermera genom lagstiftning automatiskt förvärvade full äganderätt till. Så skedde dock inte för samernas del. I stället trängdes de undan från stora delar av sina ursprungliga marker på grund av bl.a. kolonisation, exploateringsintressen, samt nedvärdering av nomadkulturen. Från att ha varit i stor majoritet blev de en minoritet på sina gamla marker. Dessa marker har sedermera kommit att betraktas som kronojord i statens ägo, vilket innebär en stor förskjutning av samernas fastighetsrättliga ställning inom loppet av fyra sekler. Gällande rätt garanterar inte samer som är medlemmar av en sameby någon starkare rätt än en bruksrätt, som till vissa delar är svagare än vad som gäller för andra bruksrättsinnehavare i Sverige. Praxis utesluter emellertid inte att renskötselrätten kan ha gett upphov till äganderätt, särskilt i nordligaste Sverige. Att samerna haft svårt att hävda sin äganderätt kan bero på att rättssystemet inte har haft en egentlig förståelse för rennäringens speciella förutsättningar, vilket gör att exempelvis beviskraven blir höga att nå upp till. Min slutsats är dock att övertygande bevis finns för att samerna har förvärvat en äganderätt, åtminstone till statlig kronomark i Lappland, oavsett om lagstiftningen för närvarande tillerkänner dem detta eller ej. Vad gäller vinterbetesmarker i Lappland föreligger inte lika starka bevis för att en äganderätt skulle ha uppstått, men däremot en bruksrätt som är starkare än dagens lagstiftning tillerkänner samerna. Vad gäller det folkrättsliga perspektivet ger de konventioner Sverige ingått inte uttryckligen stöd för att samernas markrättigheter skall erkännas, och svensk lagstiftning får sägas uppfylla de minimikrav de ställer. Sverige har dock fått internationell kritik för att inte ha funnit en lösning på och förbättrat rättssäkerheten angående samiska markrättigheter. Inte heller har Sverige ratificerat ILO-konvention nr. 169 om ursprungsfolk och stamfolk i självstyrande länder. Anledningen är just att bestämmelser som reglerar markrättigheter inte har ansetts förenliga med svenska rättsförhållanden. Man kan dock hoppas på att Sverige framöver kommer att ta intryck av den internationella utvecklingen vad gäller erkännande av urbefolkningars markanspråk. / The aim of this thesis is to examine whether the Sami people, who is an indigenous people living in the north of Sweden, could have acquired ownership of land areas in Lapland according to Swedish law, or whether they only have a right to use the land that they traditionally occupy for reindeer breeding, hunting and fishing. The question is dealt with from a land law as well as an international law approach. Concerning the land law approach, the Sami people has had a very strong position close to ownership during the 17th and 18th centuries. At that time, the Samis paid tax for their lands, which meant that they were not considered to belong to the Crown, but were treated in the same way as the independent farmers’ lands. However, while the farmers through a declaration from the King in 1789 automatically achieved full ownership of their lands, the Sami people did not. Instead, the Samis were pressed back from large parts of their original territory because of colonisation, exploitation and depreciation of their nomadic way of living. Once a majority, they found themselves a minority in their own land and their territory had become the Crown’s property. Undoubtedly, there has been an extraordinary shifting of the Sami people’s land rights within four centuries. Current law does only guarantee the members of the Sami villages the right to use land for reindeer breeding, hunting and fishing, and this right is in some aspects even weaker than that of other Swedish citizens with similar rights. Still, case law does not exclude the possibility that reindeer breeding could have originated right of ownership, especially in Lapland. My findings on this area are that there is convincing evidence that the Sami people has acquired right of ownership on the lands which they traditionally occupy all year around. On the lands that they share with others, they have a strong right to use the land during the winter, probably stronger than the legislation provides for. What concerns the international law approach, Swedish legislation does fulfil the minimum demands according to the conventions the country has ratified. Still, Sweden has been criticized of not finding a balanced solution to and improving legal certainty on Sami land rights. Sweden has not ratified the ILO Convention no. 169 con-cerning indigenous and tribal peoples in independent countries. The reason for this is mainly the article which aims at strengthening the indigenous peoples’ land rights, which Sweden does not find compatible with national law. Still, one can hope that the ongoing international development on the area will show the way, and that Sweden will pay attention to it in future legislation.

<p>Syftet med detta arbete är att, dels ur ett fastighetsrättsligt perspektiv, dels ett folkrättsligt perspektiv, utreda om Sveriges urbefolkning samerna kan sägas ha förvärvat en äganderätt till marken i Lappland enligt svensk rätt, eller om detta enbart handlar om en bruksrätt inkluderande renskötsel, jakt och fiske.</p><p>Vad gäller det fastighetsrättsliga perspektivet har samerna haft en mycket stark fastighetsrättslig ställning på 1600- och 1700-talet. Då behandlades samernas lappskatteland som sådan skattejord, som skattebönderna sedermera genom lagstiftning automatiskt förvärvade full äganderätt till. Så skedde dock inte för samernas del. I stället trängdes de undan från stora delar av sina ursprungliga marker på grund av bl.a. kolonisation, exploateringsintressen, samt nedvärdering av nomadkulturen. Från att ha varit i stor majoritet blev de en minoritet på sina gamla marker. Dessa marker har sedermera kommit att betraktas som kronojord i statens ägo, vilket innebär en stor förskjutning av samernas fastighetsrättliga ställning inom loppet av fyra sekler.</p><p>Gällande rätt garanterar inte samer som är medlemmar av en sameby någon starkare rätt än en bruksrätt, som till vissa delar är svagare än vad som gäller för andra bruksrättsinnehavare i Sverige. Praxis utesluter emellertid inte att renskötselrätten kan ha gett upphov till äganderätt, särskilt i nordligaste Sverige. Att samerna haft svårt att hävda sin äganderätt kan bero på att rättssystemet inte har haft en egentlig förståelse för rennäringens speciella förutsättningar, vilket gör att exempelvis beviskraven blir höga att nå upp till. Min slutsats är dock att övertygande bevis finns för att samerna har förvärvat en äganderätt, åtminstone till statlig kronomark i Lappland, oavsett om lagstiftningen för närvarande tillerkänner dem detta eller ej. Vad gäller vinterbetesmarker i Lappland föreligger inte lika starka bevis för att en äganderätt skulle ha uppstått, men däremot en bruksrätt som är starkare än dagens lagstiftning tillerkänner samerna.</p><p>Vad gäller det folkrättsliga perspektivet ger de konventioner Sverige ingått inte uttryckligen stöd för att samernas markrättigheter skall erkännas, och svensk lagstiftning får sägas uppfylla de minimikrav de ställer. Sverige har dock fått internationell kritik för att inte ha funnit en lösning på och förbättrat rättssäkerheten angående samiska markrättigheter. Inte heller har Sverige ratificerat ILO-konvention nr. 169 om ursprungsfolk och stamfolk i självstyrande länder. Anledningen är just att bestämmelser som reglerar markrättigheter inte har ansetts förenliga med svenska rättsförhållanden. Man kan dock hoppas på att Sverige framöver kommer att ta intryck av den internationella utvecklingen vad gäller erkännande av urbefolkningars markanspråk.</p> / <p>The aim of this thesis is to examine whether the Sami people, who is an indigenous people living in the north of Sweden, could have acquired ownership of land areas in Lapland according to Swedish law, or whether they only have a right to use the land that they traditionally occupy for reindeer breeding, hunting and fishing. The question is dealt with from a land law as well as an international law approach.</p><p>Concerning the land law approach, the Sami people has had a very strong position close to ownership during the 17th and 18th centuries. At that time, the Samis paid tax for their lands, which meant that they were not considered to belong to the Crown, but were treated in the same way as the independent farmers’ lands. However, while the farmers through a declaration from the King in 1789 automatically achieved full ownership of their lands, the Sami people did not. Instead, the Samis were pressed back from large parts of their original territory because of colonisation, exploitation and depreciation of their nomadic way of living. Once a majority, they found themselves a minority in their own land and their territory had become the Crown’s property. Undoubtedly, there has been an extraordinary shifting of the Sami people’s land rights within four centuries.</p><p>Current law does only guarantee the members of the Sami villages the right to use land for reindeer breeding, hunting and fishing, and this right is in some aspects even weaker than that of other Swedish citizens with similar rights. Still, case law does not exclude the possibility that reindeer breeding could have originated right of ownership, especially in Lapland. My findings on this area are that there is convincing evidence that the Sami people has acquired right of ownership on the lands which they traditionally occupy all year around. On the lands that they share with others, they have a strong right to use the land during the winter, probably stronger than the legislation provides for.</p><p>What concerns the international law approach, Swedish legislation does fulfil the minimum demands according to the conventions the country has ratified. Still, Sweden has been criticized of not finding a balanced solution to and improving legal certainty on Sami land rights. Sweden has not ratified the ILO Convention no. 169 con-cerning indigenous and tribal peoples in independent countries. The reason for this is mainly the article which aims at strengthening the indigenous peoples’ land rights, which Sweden does not find compatible with national law. Still, one can hope that the ongoing international development on the area will show the way, and that Sweden will pay attention to it in future legislation.</p>

The Sami in Sweden have lived on and managed their lands since time immemorial. The strong connection to the environment and nature has given them centuries of knowledge that is still applicable to this day. With the help of their ancestral knowledge the Sami have preserved their Indigenous land. With constant work towards sustainability and extractive projects of natural resources for renewable energy that takes place in Sápmi, the question is raised of who is included in the transition towards sustainable development and who the transition is for. The purpose of this study is to investigate and get a deeper understanding of Sami perspectives on sustainability and the connection to their rights. Applied methodology for this qualitative study is semi-structured interviews with nine Sami, followed by a thematic analysis of the collected empirical data. This was done to understand and analyse perceptions of sustainable development and how it relates to Sami inclusion and Sami rights, using frameworks of colonial governmentality and green colonialism. The findings suggest that a differentiation can be made concerning how the Sami perceive actions for sustainable development and the concept of sustainable development. Further, the Sami view their inclusion in policy-making and implementation in regards to questions of sustainable development in Sweden as being somewhat low or not applied at all. In relation to environmental sustainability this study shows that the implementation of Sami rights varies depending on the context, but that it is generally experienced as insufficient, and that rights are often applied to the economic units of the samebys, and not all Sami, creating a division within the Sami community. The results also show a perception of lack of political will and a neglectance to include and implement Sami rights, as state interests are prioritised. The societal and institutional conditions for the Sami to claim their rights and require inclusion within sustainable development prove that the theories of colonial governmentality and green colonialism are applicable to the current situation in Sápmi.