 |
Future
Implications |
| |
Saami political leaders continue to view the United
Nations as am important step towards greater self-determination.
In 1998, the Norwegian Saami Parliament published their three year
plan for future actions. This document outlined the importance of
continued work with ILO 169 and the United Nation’s WGIP.
(Norske Sametinget, 1998, 48-50) In addition, Anne Nourgam,
President of the Saami Council pointed out in 2001, “We
Saami also work side by side with other indigenous peoples. We are
deeply committed to fighting for the human rights of indigenous
peoples collectively. This is demonstrated through our on-going
and continuous work at the United Nations and other international
fora.” (Sami Council, 2001) |
| |
“International law has become an increasingly
signigicant mean by which the Saami and the other aboriginal
minorities are able to expand their legal position within their
own countries. One can expect this trend in the development
of minorities rights will increase.”
(Sillanpää, 1994, 233) |
| |
As
the Saami political leaders have cemented their position in
international politics, they have turned their attention toward
helping other indigenous groups. Indigenous peoples in Africa,
Central and South America, and Asia have all benefited from the
experience and resources of the Saami Council. John Bernard
Henriksen initiated a workshop series for indigenous groups to be
held before and after WGIP meetings. These workshops are to
familiarize less experienced indigenous leaders with the nuances
of international politics. (Henriksen, 2002)
|
| |
As
a dominant indigenous group, the Saami feel it is their obligation
to help less fortunate groups. The Maasai of Africa, Tibetans of
Asia, and Chittagong Hill Tribes of Bangladesh have all received
support from the Saami of Scandinavia.
The different UN agencies that deal with indigenous issues have
also benefited greatly from the Saami influence. In 1997 through
the Saami, Sweden
gave $61,633 and Norway gave $68,552 to the Voluntary Fund for the
International Decade of the World's Indigenous People. (UN, 1998,
10) In 1997-1998, Finland and Norway each almost contributed
nearly $100,000 in addition to the money given to the Voluntary
Fund.[8] (UN, 1998, 4)
|
| |
Finland,
Norway, and Sweden are involved in regional collaborations as well
as their UN affiliation. Since 1996, the Nordic States and the
Saami have been members of the Arctic Council. The Arctic Council
is revolutionary because it is a vast regional organization which
has (nearly) equal participation by national governments as well
as indigenous groups of the Arctic. It is a policy driven
organization to promote sustainability and equality in the Arctic.
The Saami are just now starting to become involved in the Barents
Euro-Arctic Council. The Barents
Council is focused on certain fields of cooperation: economy,
trade, science and technology, tourism, environment,
infrastructure, educational and cultural exchange health issues,
youth, and finally indigenous peoples. (Granholm, 2001) The
Norwegian Saami Parliament sees this organization as another
priority for future exploitation. (Nystad, 2002)
|
| |
What does this all mean for the Saami? Have their
leaders in the international arena changed their own
situation? Have they improved self-determination for their fellow
Saami? This author would contend that is the case. |
| |
Scandinavia
enjoys benefits in the global environment from being human rights
leaders. They are viewed as the most progressive countries in the
world in this respect. The more global links created between
regions and communities, the more accountability. When Canada
increases self-determination for its indigenous people,
Scandinavia feels it must match and surpass them in their own
policies. (Henriksen, 2002) When the Saami make a proposal at the
Working Group on Indigenous Populations, Norway usually feels it
must comply. Norway has much at stake when it comes to these
policies. It is both good politics and good business to have their
exemplary human rights records. By ratifying ILO 169, Norway
entered into an agreement of compliance.
|
| |
Despite
the fact that not all politicians in Norway agree with the terms
of ILO 169, they are bound to comply. (Dunfjeld, 2002) “For NGOs
generally, and indigenous peoples in particular, the human rights
system has become an increasingly important arena for reminding
governments of their internationally mandated obligations.”
(Pritchard, 1998, 7)The minimum standards set by ILO 169 have
improved land rights and self-determination for the Saami. Even
with the resistance in municipal and national governments, Saami
involvement in the international arena should continue if the
recent historical situation can be an indication of the future.
The financial and moral resources may be weakening slightly for
Nordic Saami; there is no warning that they shall be removed
altogether.
|
|
Previous
Chapter 