Self-Determination - Solution or Problem? A Study of a Possible Right to Self-Determination for the Swedish Sami Population

Abstract: The term self-determination is embedded in much difficulty. It is a term whose meaning has developed considerably from its first intended usage. Today, in a world that is in several respects becoming smaller and more conformed, certain peoples claim rights they have previously not been granted in order to protect their subsistence and preserve their culture. The Sami is one of these peoples. This essay investigates if the Sami have a right to self-determination in international law that they are currently being denied nationally or if Sweden does comply with its international obligations. Having searched the instruments most commonly claimed to internationally grant the Sami such a right, no obligation for Sweden to grant the Sami self-determination is found. The monitoring organs of these instruments are also the instances by which Sweden has been severly criticized. The instruments in question are common article 1 of ICCPR and ICESCR, article 27 of ICCPR and ICERD. However, the Sami are possibly not granted enough protection nationally but regarding the right to self-determination internationally, they are. When examining the ILO 169 that Sweden has on numerous occasions been criticized for not yet ratifying, no obligation to grant self-determination had Sweden been a party to it is found. Had the UN Draft Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples been finalized, it would not have severly impacted the situation either since the document is not legally binding. Drawing on critical legal studies a different perspective on the current legal situation is achieved. Also feminist legal theory provides criticism of the underlying ideologies and when examining the entire international legal system Sweden's motives are illuminated and explained. Conclusions drawn are that due to extensive ambiguities in the international legal system Sweden cannot be condemned for being hesitant to grant the Sami self-determination without an existing universal definition of the term. Numerous terms are interpreted too arbitrarily and subjectively. However, Sweden can be criticized for not executing its investigations at satisfactory speed, and for not granting the Sami more influence, control and protection despite the lack of an international obligation to grant self-determination, if Sweden wants to retain its position as a human rights role model.