Back to Publications

The Sámi Limbo: Outlining nearly Thirty Years of EU-Sápmi Relations

By | Article
September 12, 2023
, , , ,
Flags of the European Union, Sápmi/Sami people, Finland, Sweden and Norway in front of European Parliament background logo

Sámi, Nordic and European Union flags in front of the European Parliament logo during the Summit of Barents Euro-Arctic Indigenous Sámi People in 2023. Photo: Luke Laframboise

The Arctic Institute EU-Arctic Series 2023

Last year, I wrote an article for The Arctic Institute outlining the potential for Green Colonialism in the European Union’s Arctic Policy.1) At the time I argued that in that policy, through its emphasis on economic development in line with the wider European Green Deal, would further an industrial agenda in the Arctic that many in the north argue resembles the colonial policies of the recent past.2)

At the time, I had highlighted the Fosen case in Norway as an example of a positive development. In 2021 the Norwegian Supreme Court ruled that the Fosen windfarms, a major wind power park near Trondheim, had been built without direct and sustained consultation with the local Sámi reindeer herding communities.3) As a result of the operating licenses granted to the developers and operators of the project, including state-backed Statkraft, were deemed invalid.4)

Unfortunately, 500 days (and counting) after the ruling, despite repeated calls for the Norwegian government to act and revoke the license, nothing had been done to rectify the situation.5) As a result protesters descended on Olso, led by Sámi youth organisation NSR-Nourat. They were supported by environmentally concerned organisations from across the country, including noted climate agitator Greta Thunberg.6) The governmental response was tepid, as they showed little appetite towards resolving either issue at hand. This was despite briefly noting that the Fosen case highlighted a clear human rights violation, a statement in line with the rulings of the state’s supreme court.7) This inaction has only further strengthened concerns that the Sámi face a green future that may not take their rights as an Indigenous people into account.

The European Union, the Sámi and Indigenous Rights

In this environment, the will of state actors to follow through and protect Indigenous rights, including the freedom to self-determine and obtain free, prior and informed consultation, has never been more relevant. For Sámi in Finland and Sweden these rights should, theoretically, transcend state-level enforcement. The European Union endorsed the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples in 2007 and has been steadily championing Indigenous rights since 1998.8)

However, this has not been the case. As it turns out, the Sámi are outside of the series of policies that have come to define Indigenous rights for European partners.9) This has created a paradox in which, though the Sámi within the bloc share the same concerns as their counterparts in Norway, they do not have the added layer of protection that EU policy provides.

This rights gap is but a part of the wider 30-year relationship between the Sámi and the European Union, a history that has been rarely discussed. From early Sámi scepticism towards enlargement, to the EU’s growing involvement in championing Indigenous rights, the gap between assumed rights and reality is mirrored by an apparent lack of understanding between bloc and people. As this paper will discuss, the paradox of Sámi Indigenous rights in the EU is but the first step towards remedying this situation.

Nordic Engagement and Sámi Apprehension

The start of this story began in late 1994 when Finland and Sweden voted to join the European Union, while fellow Nordic Norway ultimately decided against membership.10)

For the Sámi, these referenda came during a time of political transformation. After decades of campaigning, they had finally been granted a limited form of representative government in the form of Sámi Parliaments: Norway in 1989, Sweden in 1993 and Finland reformatting theirs in 1995.11) Through this period, however, much of the international representation remained in the hands of the Saami Council, a civil society actor that has been in existence since 1956.

At the time, many Sámi, across all three borders, had their misgivings.12) After centuries of political influence by outside powers, the idea of being a minority underneath a supranational bloc did not hold much appeal. As Reetta Toivanen noted in her rare work on this period:

“Before the referendum on EU membership, in 1994, the Sámi political leaders were, in general, very sceptical about the EU…In the minds of the people of Lapland, the EU was seen as a ‘monster’, which only would be interested in exploiting the natural resources of Lapland.”13)

Regardless of this reticence, the Sámi of Sweden and Finland were brought into the Union, separating them from their Norwegian peers. This was a state of affairs that echoed the historical divisions that separated Sámi across borders, one that few Sámi wished to see repeated. To head off fears of such a division, Swedish negotiators asked the that traditional nomadic rights of reindeer herders be enshrined.14) As a result, protocol 3, known as the Sámi protocol, was added to the accession documents which granted “exclusive rights to reindeer husbandry within traditional Sámi areas”.15) This meant that traditional reindeer herding areas, which often spanned across borders, would remain accessible for Sámi use. This became the first and, so far, only protocol granting specifically Sámi rights at the European level.

Into the Union

In the years following integration, Sámi fears of the great EU ‘Monster’ proved to be overblown.16) Traditional cultural rights were not directly impacted by the EU membership, nor were their lands exploited more vigorously than they had been before. Instead, Sámi organisations such as the Saami Council began to see the benefits of inclusion in a larger intra-governmental regime.

Funding, a perennial problem for indigenous peoples organisations, became easier to access. The European Regional Development Fund, through the INTERREG programme, became a particularly important source of needed funds for cultural and language projects.17) This meant that Sámi organisations no longer had to look to just government funds to achieve their goals.18)

Overall, the transition into the EU was relatively smooth for the Sámi, as their main political projects remained domestic and regional. That would begin to change shortly after the ascension of Sweden and Finland as the EU itself started to become more involved in the cause of Indigenous rights. However, perhaps to the surprise of some, it was not directly related to the inclusion of the Sámi. Instead, it was for other reasons.

Outward Indigenous Policy

The first official inclusion of Indigenous peoples in the agenda EU body came in 1997, as part of the 2012th Council meeting in Luxembourg.19) The meeting at the time focused on how best to strengthen cooperation with global south partners, particularly those in Africa, the Caribbean and the Pacific. Through these conversations, Indigenous groups in these countries were highlighted as key partners towards furthering the bloc’s wider goals of reducing poverty and sustainable development. The logic went that Indigenous minorities in these countries prevalently faced harsh living conditions and a lack of social protection, and, as such would be an ideal target for direct aid to meet the human rights goals the bloc itself had laid out.20)

Towards this end, the Commission set to work on producing a working document the following year, imaginatively titled On support for indigenous peoples in the development co-operation of the Community and the Member States.21) This document, which is sometimes referred to as the Working Document in several reports, became the foundational text for EU work on Indigenous rights. Through follow-up reports that started in 2002, these goals would be built upon, leading to the endorsement of the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples (UNDRIP) in 2007.22)

European Arctic Aspirations and the Sámi Place within

During this period of greater Indigenous engagement, Sámi organisations, in particular the Saami Council, became more aware of the potential benefit of greater engagement with the bloc. In 2000 at the Sámi conference in Giron/Kiruna, the Saami Council called for an Indigenous rights regime to be put in place in the EU, alongside other calls for Sámi to be included in Arctic decision-making.23) This was a longstanding objective that had been in place since 1992, however, the renewed calls were indicative of this widening awareness. During the 2002 follow-up for the 1998 working paper on Indigenous rights, the Saami Council was directly referenced as working alongside the European Union to determine how best to engage with other Indigenous groups.24) Finally in 2004 the Saami Council noted an EU acknowledgement of their Indigenous status, while also calling for greater protection for their Indigenous, echoing their previous statements.25)

In 2011 the Saami Council was invited, alongside other indigenous representatives such as the Inuit Circumpolar Council, to discuss the state of Arctic affairs. Done as part of the wider Arctic push the EU had begun to embark on, these meetings were designed to discuss how best to bring the EU into wider Arctic decision-making through hearing from northern actors themselves.26) Initially, these meetings were conducted at ad hoc and informal level between representatives of the European Commission and the relevant stakeholders. However, as the decade wore on, these meetings would evolve and expand in scope. The result was the Arctic Stakeholders Forum, today known as the Arctic Forum and Indigenous Dialog.27)

The Sámi Limbo

For the Saami Council, this was a positive development. They were now closer to EU institutions and decision-makers than they had ever been, alongside Indigenous partners they had interacted with through various other fora. However, it soon became clear that there was an inequality of rights between these external peoples and the Sámi themselves. As it would turn out, the Sámi were uniquely excluded from the EU rights afforded to external Indigenous groups. They existed in a policy limbo.

How this came about can be seen a bit more clearly when Indigenous rights protection under EU law is considered through the lens of external policy. Through the intervening years following the endorsement of UNDRIP, the scope and protection for Indigenous rights grew. Through repeated Council resolutions and conclusions rights had become a key part of external funding schemes and diplomatic efforts of the bloc.28) These same rights were repeatedly reaffirmed, notably through the 2016 follow-up on the EU’s policies towards Indigenous rights and all three of the most recent EEAS Action Plans regarding Human rights.29) In short, Indigenous rights were as enshrined into the EU’s external plans as any other human right. Perhaps more so.

However, perhaps as an oversight, no internal instrument regarding Indigenous rights was ever implemented.30) Instead, Indigenous rights fell under the jurisdiction of the Member-States rather than under any specific EU policy.

Greater Engagement for Sámi Rights

In recent years, this gap between external policy and internal reality has been something that the Saami Council, alongside its domestic partners, has begun work on correcting. So far, the primary avenue towards this has been lobby work and continued involvement as part of the stakeholder engagement processes. This has borne some early fruit and, the Sámi more broadly have been cited as key actors in the two most recent EU arctic policy documents, though in a similar manner to previous EU-Indigenous engagement documents.31) In 2019 the Saami Council established an EU Unit which, as the name would suggest, has been focused on providing a direct link between the bloc and the Sámi.32) Previously this work had been done on an ad hoc basis. Yet, by establishing a specific unit, the EU became a direct priority with funding coming from various European programmes, including INTERREG and other agencies.

Since then, there has been a relative flurry of European activity on the part of the Saami Council, from a two-year fact-finding project titled titled “Filling the EU-Sápmi Knowledge Gaps” to an EU-outreach week in the summer of 2022.33) However, the most significant has been a matter of strategies. In 2022 a formal EU-Sápmi Strategy was released by the Saami Council, two years after a similar policy directed at Arctic states.34) This policy outlines the key goals that the Sámi wish to meet to have a functional and fulfilling relationship with the European Union. Though many of these were aspirational, perhaps the most significant was the very first goal, which is to address the gap between external Indigenous policy and the reality of an internal Indigenous people.

The Future of EU-Sámi Relations

In 1995, the Sámi became the first, and, so far, only recognised Indigenous people in continental Europe. For a people that had faced assimilation through colonialist policies, the idea of being brought into a multi-national bloc was viewed with a well-founded place of scepticism, born of a long history of outside interference in their lives and livelihoods.35) Since then, life within the European Union has proven to be fruitful, if at times obscure. After all, the issues faced by Sámi activists and politicians have so far remained decided regional, if not local.

Since the EU began its pivot north it has become increasingly clear that a stronger relationship is needed if this coexistence is to continue. Inroads have certainly been made between bloc and people. Work remains in building a satisfactory relationship. To echo the Saami Council’s own Sápmi-EU Strategy, “The EU´s lack of awareness and knowledge of Sápmi is hampering the implementation of Sámi people’s rights. A prerequisite for a true partnership between the EU and Sápmi is the recognition of the Sámi people as an Indigenous People within the EU framework”.36) How such a recognition would work in tangible terms is remains unknown. What is known is that such protections would only further strengthen the position of the Sámi as an Indigenous people with rights that go beyond those afforded under the EU human rights framework. As the ongoing Fosen fallout demonstrates, Sámi rights remain a contested issue. Further protection is needed if the green transition is to go ahead without leaving at least one Indigenous people behind.

Luke Laframboise is a Ph.D. Student in Sámi Studies at Umeå University in northern Sweden.

References[+]

Latest

November 22, 2024 The Arctic This Week Take Five: Week of 17 November, 2024 By:
Take Five
Read more
November 21, 2024 Sanction-Proof? Russia’s Arctic Ambitions and the China Factor By: and
Commentary
Read more
November 19, 2024 Past Need Not Be Prologue: Applying the Lessons of History to NATO-Russia Relations in the Arctic By:
Article
Read more