Norway and Its Obligations under ILO 169 – Some Considerations after the Recent Stjernøy Supreme Court Case

Published version. Source at http://dx.doi.org/10.17585/arctic.v7.583 The Norwegian Supreme Court recently pronounced its first ruling on a case which started with investigations by the Finnmark Commission. The Stjernøy Case1 arises from a title claim to land used as pasture by two groups of Sámi re...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Published in:Arctic Review on Law and Politics
Main Author: Ravna, Øyvind
Format: Article in Journal/Newspaper
Language:English
Published: Gyldendal Akademisk 2016
Subjects:
VDP::Samfunnsvitenskap: 200::Rettsvitenskap: 340
VDP::Social sciences: 200::Law: 340
Samerett / Sami law
Tingsrett / Property Law
Urfolks menneskerettigheter / Indigenous human rights
Norway
Arctic
Arctic review on law and politics
Finnmark
sami
Online Access:https://hdl.handle.net/10037/10448
https://doi.org/10.17585/arctic.v7.583
Description
Summary:Published version. Source at http://dx.doi.org/10.17585/arctic.v7.583 The Norwegian Supreme Court recently pronounced its first ruling on a case which started with investigations by the Finnmark Commission. The Stjernøy Case1 arises from a title claim to land used as pasture by two groups of Sámi reindeer herders. A contributory reason for the claim was that there are mining activities on the island, from which the landowner is entitled to benefit according to the Norwegian Mineral Act. The Supreme Court ruling raises some fundamental questions, among others: what is the significance of ILO 169 in relation to the Finnmark Act?

Similar Items