Sweden, Norway, and Sovereignty : A comparative work of the ideals of sovereignty between Norway and Sweden and how their respective perspectives can explain differences in Sámi rights.

(1)

Department of Political Science

Sweden, Norway, and Sovereignty

A comparative work of the ideals of sovereignty between Norway and Sweden and how their respective perspectives can explain differences in Sámi rights.

Karl-Peder Sundström

Department of Political Science Bachelor Thesis, 15 credits Political Science III (30 credits) Fall term 2020

Supervisor: Wojciech Szrubka Examinator: Tyra Hertz

(2)

1

Abstract

The purpose of this thesis is to explore how different versions of sovereignty manifest themselves in the central founding documents relating to the Sámi parliament in both Norway and Sweden. This analysis of the different approaches to sovereignty could be used to give an explanation to the differences between the Sámi parliaments in Norway and Sweden. The research questions of this thesis were: Within central founding documents can one see different versions of sovereignty between Sweden and Norway? What differences can one observe between the countries in relation to ideas regarding internal and external sovereignty? To answer these questions, different theories of sovereignty were presented and evaluated. This thesis used content analysis with a deductive approach and the primary materials that were analysed were the founding legal documents and law propositions to the Sámi parliaments. The major finding of this thesis paper were that Norway and Sweden were observably different when it came to their versions of sovereignty, in conclusion Sweden had a stricter adherence to internal sovereignty and Norway was exceedingly more orthodox and put more effort into their external sovereignty.

Keywords

Sámi parliament, Sovereignty, Internal Sovereignty, External Sovereignty, Founding Document, Law Proposition, Sweden, and Norway.

(3)

2

Introduction

The two countries Norway and Sweden share a border with each other, both are constitutional monarchies, and both can be classed as liberal democracies, they are both parliamentary constitutional monarchies, but they however treat their Sámi rights differently. The differences between Sweden and Norway regarding the Sámi people’s rights can be boiled down to that the respective countries have different laws regarding if consultation is required when decisions are made, and that the Sámi parliaments are differently arranged including then how they have structured their representation institutions, the Sámi parliament. Previous researchers like Ulf Mörkenstam in his paper Different Institutions in Similar States: The Norwegian and Swedish

Sámediggis, Ethnopolitics have looked at the topic, but not in regards the Sámi parliament

through the lens of sovereignty.1 There exists a gap in research in relation to this topic therefor this, the research done in conjunction to this paper shall try to fill this gap by looking at the difference with theories of connected to sovereignty as an analysis to why there is a difference and how this gap will be breached is with looking at different legal documents that discuss when the different Sámi parliaments were made those documents being the Act of 12 June 1987

No.56 concerning the Sameting (the Sámi parliament) and other Sami legal matters (the Sami act), ot.prp.nr.33 (1986-1987) om lov om sametinget og andre samiske rettsforhold (sameloven), Sveriges Riksdag. 1992: 1433 and Regeringens proposition 1992/93: 32.

The value in exploring these issues is that if there is indeed an explanatory reason to why these differences exist, this thesis believes it will enrich the current understanding of sovereignty and how it can be applied to help explain differences. Thus, the purpose of this paper will be to explore how different versions of sovereignty manifests in central founding documents relating to the Sámi parliament between Norway and Sweden. An understanding of how

Aim and research question

This thesis aims to use sovereignty as an analytical framework to discover the differences between Sweden and Norway regarding the rights of the Sámi parliament. To this study central founding documents from Sweden and Norway’s establishment of the Sámi parliaments will be used.

By analysing central founding documents I will attempt to answer the following research questions:

1. Within central founding documents can one see different versions of sovereignty between Sweden and Norway?

2. What differences can one observe between the countries in relation to ideas regarding internal and external sovereignty?

(6)

5

In the theory section work by other researchers regarding the Sovereignty will be used. For the analysis section founding legal documents about the institutional design of the Sámediggi in Sweden and Norway will be used. The analysis will use first-hand sources.2_{In the first-hand} sources regarding the creation of the Sámi parliaments the researched time will be when the Sámi parliaments where established in the late 80: s and early 90: s. The Sámediggi have continuously been undergoing changes throughout the past 30 years. However, this thesis focuses on the establishment of the parliaments.

Disposition

Chapter 1 of this paper will discuss the background relating to the subject, it will give the historical context of the Sami and their Sámi parliaments, introduce an article discussing why Norway is not a part of the EU, and lastly will introduce the earlier research done that is connected to my thesis. Chapter 2 will discuss in detail the idea of sovereignty through its definition in accordance with political theorists, what it means, and introduce the sub definitions of sovereignty, internal and external. Chapter 3 will describe the method, here the research methodology will be described and the reasons behind it and the paper will show the approach to how it will find the answers to the questions posed in the beginning of the thesis. Chapter 4 is the material section, and will describe the material for the analysis, how it was chosen, and its boundaries. Chapter 5 is the analysis section, where sovereignty is applied to analyse the material. Lastly, chapter 6 will include the discussion and conclusion, where there will be answers to the introductory problem, final thoughts of the analysis of the material, and further questions about the research.

Chapter 1: Background

The Sámediggi in Sweden and Norway

Historical context

The Sámi parliament was established in Norway in 1989 and in 1993 in Sweden.3 This introduced a new popularly elected representative body within the democratic system within both of the countries, and its electorate was ethnically defined.4_{The function of these} parliaments are to represent the Sámi people in each respective country, in Sweden for example they were seen as an institutional prerequisite for the Sámi people so they could independently develop their culture and they could do this through a decision making body that was representative for the entire minority.5 Looking from an international perspective the Sámi parliaments are referred to as models for indigenous self-governance and participation in decision making.6_{In Sweden the newly formed parliament, the Sámediggi was given the status} of a government agency align with the Swedish government’s directive that there was going to be no constitutional changes, that would be contrary to the principles of the Swedish way of government.7_{The two institutions are for non-territorial autonomy, they have no legislative} authority and they cannot independently finance themselves, they are state-based, this means

2_{Act of 12 June 1987 No. 56, concerning the Sameting and other legal matters (the sami act) and Sveriges Riksdag. 1992: 1433 both are} about when they first structured the Sámediggi. The analysis section will also use founding documents that are the law propos itions that both countries had before their Sami parliament laws were made. In Sweden it is Regeringens proposition 1992/93: 32 om samerna och samisk and in Norway “Ot.prp.nr.33 (1986-1987) om lov om sametinget og andre samiska rettsforhold (sameloven)

3_{Mörkenstam, Indigenous self-determination through a government agency? The impossible task of the Swedish Sámediggi, p. 107.} 4_{Ibid, p. 107.}

5_{Mörkenstam, Indigenous self-determination through a government agency? The impossible task of the Swedish Sámediggi, p. 107.} 6_{Ibid, p. 107.}

(7)

6

that they are delegated authority from their respective national parliament.8 As mentioned earlier the countries are evidently similar but also differ in several important aspects, their legal status and position differ, the Sámediggi in Sweden as a subordinate to the Swedish government and its legal basis is more limited because it has a more limited mandate.9 It is stated in the Swedish Sámi act that the Sámediggi is a government agency and its general mission is to monitor issues related to Sámi culture, in Norway it has a more autonomous position and a wider mandate.10 Another difference is that the Norwegian Sámi parliament has gradually increased in both autonomy and influence, one thing that has changed a lot is that now the Norwegian Sámediggi must be consulted in matters concerning the Sámi.11 In Sweden this is not the case, as no right to consultation has been ratified.12 Lastly the respective national government have delegated different tasks. In Norway, these tasks include language initiatives, funding to Sámi industry the management of cultural heritage and other things, but they do not work with issues regarding reindeer husbandry which has been stated as a traditional Sámi livelihood.13_{The Swedish Sámi parliament is vastly different from this because its} administrative tasks related to reindeer husbandry is among the most important besides issues about language culture and education.14. Until now of the two countries, it is only Norway that has ratified ILO 169, a convention. That recognises indigenous peoples right to self-determination within a nation-state.15

Earlier research

Many political theorists have discussed the impact of international groups and intranational groups, like the European Union, on sovereignty. In the text Nei til EU: är det rationellt för

Norge att stå utanför EU? by Stefan Höjelid, he illustrates why Norway is not a member of the

EU. According to his text, Norway is voluntarily not a member of the European union, but it is part of a trade agreement with the EU called EFTA.16 Later on in the article it is stated that rational choice is something they use to analyse Norway’s actions17_{and the methodology that} they use is argument analysis and critical idea analysis.18 In the end of the article the author presents the results that Norway is currently in a standstill19 about the EU question, which could be explained by rational choice. This text is important because here we have a difference between Norway and Sweden besides the Sámi parliaments that can possibly be explained by sovereignty.

Earlier research regarding the paper topic Different instutions similar states: The Norwegain

and Swedisg Sámediggis by Ulf Mörkenstam and Tre aspekter av suveränitet över Sápmi en komparativ flerfallstudie av Sverige, Norge och Finlands ställningstagande till ILO 169 med utgång I markfrågan by Hanna Lindqvist. The first text by Ulf Mörkenstam, is a comparison

between Sweden and Norway’s Sámi parliaments, their structures, and why perhaps they were designed differently. The paper concludes mentioning that even though the Swedish and

8_{Mörkenstam, Political cleavages in indigenous representation: The case of the Norwegian and Swedish Sámediggis p. 108.} 9_{Ibid, p. 108.}

10_{Ibid, p. 108.}

11_{Mörkenstam, Political cleavages in indigenous representation: The case of the Norwegian and Swedish Sámediggis p. 109.} 12_{Ibid, p. 109}

13_{Ibid, p. 109} 14_{Ibid, p. 109}

15_Semb, Why (not) Commit? Norway, Sweden and Finland and the ILO Convention 169 p. 122-123. 16_{Andersson, Nei til EU: är det rationellt för Norge att stå utanför EU? p. 1-2.}

17_{Andersson, Nei til EU: är det rationellt för Norge att stå utanför EU? p. 4.} 18_{Andersson, Nei til EU: är det rationellt för Norge att stå utanför EU? p. 10.} 19_{Andersson, Nei til EU: är det rationellt för Norge att stå utanför EU? p. 39.}

(8)

7

Norwegian Sámi parliaments were established with institutional features that were similar, there was evidently policy diffusion between the two countries.20_{. Several differences which} affect their influence and autonomy within their respective political systems.21_{The paper} describes that the autonomy of the Swedish Sámi parliament is limited because of its formal position within the governmental hierarchy whereas its Norwegian counterpart can take political initiatives on all institutional levels and can challenge decisions. Furthermore, in Norway the autonomy of the Sámi parliament is characterized as being integrated in the state through formal procedures and this creates chances of influencing and having an affect on public decisions that can affect the Sámi.22 The author answered onto why these countries chose different institutional designs and with the help of analysing critical junctures they saw that the work of the Sami rights commission in the 1980’s : “ideological repertoires available to the political actors; and the strength of the Sámi movement in the two countries after Alta and the Taxed Mountain cases. Together, these factors made the scope of political options broader in Norway, giving the political actors greater chances for influencing the outcome.”23

The paper by Hanna Lindqvist, is a comparative work between Sweden, Norway, and Finland about the ratification of ILO 169. This study puts its focus on three aspects of the right to territory section in ILO 169 namely, right to land, right to resources and a right to influence and it goes on to try and explain why Sweden and Finland have not ratified ILO 169.24 The paper uses sovereignty as a theoretical framework.25 The author concludes that Sweden’s decision not to ratify ILO 169 is because by doing so it would mean a greater encroachment on the stately sovereignty over land and resources than it would be in Norway. This can be seen as the state does not want to give up its sovereignty on land that has traditionally been used by the Sámi. Lastly the author mentions that there are economic reasons regarding the right to resources that makes things difficult.26

Earlier research is important for this paper because the results from the two papers can be used to compare with my conclusions to legitimize it and research done in these papers have been useful in giving information and material to what to look at when analysing and researching the topic of Sámi rights in Sweden and Norway. Höjelid’s paper is important because it shows that Norway and Sweden are different not just when it comes to their Sámi parliaments but in other ways as well and the second and third papers are relevant because they handle the themes similar to my paper and their results are thus important. My paper will contribute to something new because it handles the parliaments and sovereignty.

Chapter 2: Theory

Sovereignty

It was not until recently that the idea of sovereignty gained the role that it has today, and that is because of a certain historical constellation, leading to developments regarding what the term

20_Mörkenstam, Different instutions similar states: The Norwegain and Swedisg Sámediggis, p. 47. 21_{Ibid, p. 47.}

22_Mörkenstam, Different instutions similar states: The Norwegain and Swedisg Sámediggis p. 47. 23_{Ibid p. 47.}

24_{Sundström & Lindqvist,} Tre aspekter av suveränitet över Sápmi en komparativ flerfallstudie av Sverige, Norge och Finlands ställningstagande till ILO 169 med utgång I markfrågan p. 2.

25_{Sundström & Lindqvist,} Tre aspekter av suveränitet över Sápmi en komparativ flerfallstudie av Sverige, Norge och Finlands ställningstagande till ILO 169 med utgång I markfrågan p. 14.

26_{Sundström & Lindqvist,} Tre aspekter av suveränitet över Sápmi en komparativ flerfallstudie av Sverige, Norge och Finlands ställningstagande till ILO 169 med utgång I markfrågan p. 26-27.

(9)

8

means.27_{As state formation progressed, the order that was created made room for particularistic} states that existed side by side and they defined themselves by how the claimed sovereignty and this affected their relations to each other.28 This made that sovereignty gained an internal and external dimension “which met, however in the right of self-determination.29_{The most defining} phenomenon if you want to understand modern sovereignty regarding its medieval counterpart is that about the territorialization of political rule by means of state formation.30_{When it was} decided that state rule was territorially defined this created a distinction between the internal and the external and then in relation to people it created an idea of nationals and foreigners.31 This created an idea of sovereignty where it was manifested an idea that you did not only control the inhabitants of your territory, but you had control over your own borders.32 In conclusion, modern international law has from the start referred to the relationship among states, international law was not from the start concerned with human rights, but this changed and became theme in the legitimation of rule, and this would change internal sovereignty.33

Sovereignty is a concept which main reference point is political, and at its most general, sovereignty is about order, and the relation of ruling.34 When one acknowledges sovereignty, they are at the same time recognising that there exists a fundamental political order and this defines the most basic political distinction between different parts like those who exercise sovereignty and those who do not. Sovereignty both identifies and gives an explanation to a relation of ruling, of dominion over others.35 This creates a relationship, and this is a relation of both power over specified persons and of obedience from them.36_{Two dimensions of} sovereignty those being internal and external sovereignty are important to further develop because they give more depth to the subject of sovereignty and more analysis can thus be done with it. The discussion of internal sovereignty has been conceptual, it is all about “the character of the acknowledged relationship of us as citizens to the state, which legitimates government through the exercise of authority, power and law”.37_{In contrast external sovereignty, its primary} explanatory force is that it comes from the idea of the recognition of an entitlement by states that they are not to be invaded.38

Two forms of sovereignty that this thesis finds important given the material and analysis is international legal and domestic sovereignty. International legal sovereignty is about the practices that are associated with the mutual recognition between territorial entities that have formal judicial independence.39_{International and legal sovereignty concerns issues of authority} and legitimacy, it is not about control.40 Domestic sovereignty refers to the formal organisation of political authority within the state and it is also about the ability of authorities those being public to effectively exercise control within the border of their own polity.41_{While international} and legal sovereignty is about authority and legitimacy as earlier stated, domestic sovereignty

27_{Grim & Cooper, Sovereignty: The Origin and Future of a Political and Legal Concept, p. 5.}

28_{Ibid, p. 5.}

29_{Ibid, p. 5.}

30_{Grim & Cooper, Sovereignty: The Origin and Future of a Political and Legal Concept, p. 77.} 31_{Grim & Cooper, Sovereignty: The Origin and Future of a Political and Legal Concept, p. 78.}

32_{Ibid, p. 78.} 33_{Ibid, p. 79.}

34_{Prokhovnik, Internal/external: The state of sovereignty p. 7.}

35_{Ibid, p. 7.} 36_{Ibid, p. 7.}

37_{Prokhovnik, Internal/external: The state of sovereignty p. 9} 38_{Ibid, p. 9.}

39_{Krasner, Sovereignty: organized hypocrisy p. 3.} 40_{Krasner, Sovereignty: organized hypocrisy p. 4.} 41_{Ibid, p. 4.}

(10)

9

is about both authority and control, to have legitimate authority within a polity and to effectively exercise the authority within that polity is the focus of specification.42_{Most rulers have sought} international legal sovereignty, that they get the recognition of other states, this is because it provides them with both material and normative resources, sovereignty is a ticket of grand admission.43_{All states that are recognised have judicial equality and international law thus is} based on the consent of states, and if a state is recognised it can get into treaties with other states.44 This recognition make’s you immune against both civil and criminal actions.45 Rulers have sought international legal sovereignty that have sought recognition by other states, they sought after this because it provided them with both material and normative resources. By facilitating accords, this gives rulers the ability to secure external resources and that can then enhance their ability to stay in power and promote security, economic and idea national interests of their constituents.46 Recognition makes you immune against both civil and criminal actions.47 The book Sovereignty: organized hypocrisy by Stephen D. Krasner and Internal/external: The

state of sovereignty by Raia Prokhovnik are important to this paper because they explain about

the different dimensions of sovereignty. At the same time these works explain the conditions and why some actors would want to achieve international-legal sovereignty, and this will be important when analysing the material regarding how certain states can act in order to gain international and domestic sovereignty. Prokhovnik’s article is also important for this thesis because it gives a more general explanation of what sovereignty is and it at the same time introduces that sovereignty has both an internal and external dimension. This is useful for the analysis later on and this is good because the next article goes more in depth about the different dimensions of sovereignty. For the sake of simplicity and because of their extreme alikeness this paper treats international legal sovereignty and domestic sovereignty to be practically the same thing as external and internal sovereignty given that they have the same characteristics. On the subject of internal and external sovereignty, The reflexive relationship between internal

and external sovereignty by Christina Eckes helps this paper present a way at looking at the

relationship between the two forms of sovereignty. The paper argues that for an understanding of sovereignty as a continuum, where internal and external sovereignty are connected to each other, you will have to see that external sovereignty has changed along with the internal sovereignty towards popular sovereignty.48 The political autonomy of citizens is extended to international relations, and this is important because in a globalised world according to the author relevant decisions are externalised, they are taken outside of the domestic constitutional structure.49 In internal sovereignty as it has been shown earlier the legal status of the sovereign can be seen as its constitutional independence, it needs to have legal authority to govern its own territory witch is linked with its ability to do so, one supports the other and helps it.50_This decides whether a government can be effective and that then decides if it can claim internal legal sovereignty. If a country want to claim internal sovereignty modern states need to show that they can govern their territory and people effectively and effective action is at the international level is at the very heart of external sovereignty according to the author, in a

42_{Krasner, Sovereignty: organized hypocrisy p. 10.} 43_{Krasner, Sovereignty: organized hypocrisy p. 16.} 44_{Ibid, p. 16.}

45_{Krasner, Sovereignty: organized hypocrisy p. 17.}

46_{Ibid, p. 17.}

47_{Krasner, Sovereignty: organized hypocrisy p. 7.}

48_{Eckes, The reflexive relationship between internal and external sovereignty p. 43.}

49_{Ibid, p. 43.} 50_{Ibid, p. 43.}

(11)

10

globalised world it also necessarily enhances the internal sovereignty.51 “Public international law hence does not only work as constraints but also serves as an enabling interface where states can govern; sovereignty does not only work as a keep out sign but also serves as a means to enable those who enjoy it to take legally valid actions under public international law”.52

Sovereignty is best conceptualized in terms of, not of state control, but instead as state authority.53 State control has differed and faded quite a lot over time, but the states claim to ultimate authority has persisted for more than three centuries. The author offers a conceptualization of sovereignty where it is an institution which imparts to the state what they call meta-political authority which is that “states are empowered or authorized to decide what is political in the first place. With sovereignty, states do not simply have ultimate authority over things political; they have the authority to relegate activities, issues, and practices to the economic, social, cultural, and scientific realms of authority or to the states' own realm-the political.”54 Janice E. Thomson’s research article gives another way of looking at sovereignty that this paper finds more realistic, that sovereignty is about authority and not control. 55 Regarding how sovereignty works when a country has indigenous people, indigenous peoples are subjects to arbitrary decisions made by the dominant society, this relationship between the dominant society and the indigenous minority is best seen through a system of asymmetric power, where the minority live at the mercy of the majority.56 Self-determination that is seen as non-domination challenges the language of modern constitutionalism, in which self-determination is primarily interpreted in terms of independence and state sovereignty.57 The classical view of sovereignty is that it is the final authority over all legal and political matters within a specific and bounded territory, this than means that freedom of a self-determining people is conceived in terms of non-interference.58This means that no agent, a-person, organisation, or state outside the community has a right to interfere upon decisions made or actions chosen by the sovereign state and at the same time, the sovereign state has no right to interfere with the affairs of another sovereign state.59_{The idea of some shared or parallel} sovereignty within the nation-state challenges the norm that nations have the power in interpreting and institutionalising political rights, and it erodes the de facto autonomy of the nation-state.60_{This is important to the paper because it gives information about how the idea of} sovereignty works when it comes to indigenous peoples.

Summary

Sovereignty was based on the idea of limiting the reach of rulers and concentrating their powers, this then created an idea of a state, territorialization of political rule is what it is grounded on. Sovereignty’s main reference point is political and the relation of ruling and order. Internal sovereignty discusses about the relationship between citizens and the state, that the citizens acknowledge the state this creates legitimization this grants governments through the exercise of authority, power, and law. Internal sovereignty is about the internal affairs of the state, and then who has the power within it, the internal sovereign has the ultimate power, and the final

51_{Eckes, The reflexive relationship between internal and external sovereignty p. 43.} 52_{Eckes, The reflexive relationship between internal and external sovereignty p. 44.}

53_{Thomson, State sovereignty in international relations: Bridging the gap between theory and empirical research p. 214.}

54_{Ibid, p. 214.}

55_Thomson_{, State sovereignty in international relations: Bridging the gap between theory and empirical research} 56_{Mörkenstam, Recognition as if sovereigns? A procedural understanding of indigenous self-determination p. 638.} 57_{Ibid, p. 638.}

58_{Ibid, p. 638.} 59_{Ibid, p. 638.}

(12)

11

independent authority and this is binding to all citizens.61 Another summarizing thing about internal sovereignty is that “sovereignty over the same territory cannot reside simultaneously in two different authorities, that is, sovereignty is indivisible”.62_{External sovereignty is about} recognition by other states, it is about your entitlement. International sovereignty is about mutual recognition between territorial entities that have formal judicial independence and domestic sovereignty is about the formal organisation of political authority within the state. Lastly sovereignty is best conceptualized is terms of not state control but authority and this means that they do not just have power over political things but also have authority of economic, social, and cultural.

Chapter 3: Method

This bachelor thesis is based content analysis, wherein the studied materials are specific legal documents.63 This method can be argued for because Norway and Sweden are similar

countries. The theoretical premise/framework is sovereignty, its internal and external

dimensions.

In this study content analysis was used as the central research methodology. This method will be used to analyse official legal documents. Content analysis is a research method that gives systematic and objective means to make valid inferences from verbal, visual or written data so one can describe and quantify specific phenomena. The goal of content analysis is to enhance the inherent quality of the results by relating the categories to the environment or the context that made the data.64 This analysis technique gives the opportunity to describe the manifest or latent content of communication by measuring for example the frequency, intensity of occurrences of words, order, or phrases.65 The method is used by creating a coding frame of the different material and this will put it into different categories.

The way this thesis will use this method is by first, gathering the material and getting familiar with the material. Patterns in the studied material have been searched for and have later been categorised into larger themes. For the analysis, a deductive approach is used where the research questions are considered, and this thesis chose specifically to search for patterns concerning or related to sovereignty.

An inductive approach where no codes were made before going through the material could have alternatively been a method. This thesis chose not to use an inductive approach because the material that was studied were four extensive government documents that were about the enactment of a Sámi parliament. In those there was possibly a myriad of themes and patterns and other ideas that could taken a long time to go through given the amount of information. Due to the natural limitations of a study of this kind limiting the thesis to one specific area of themes was preferable. In the coding scheme the themes were taken from the research questions which is something important when you do a deductive qualitative content analysis.

The coding scheme has been divided into themes, code numbers, code, and a description of the code. There are two main themes, internal and external sovereignty. Defining the codes are

61_Heywood,_{Political Theory}_{. p. 92.}

62_{Morgenthau, The problem of sovereignty reconsidered, p. 350}

63_{The theoretical framework was initially inspired by Mills method of difference. This method can be argued for because Norway and} Sweden are similar countries.

64_{Downe-Wamboldt, Content analysis: Method, applications, and issues p. 314.} 65_{Ibid, p. 314.}

(13)

12

important and that is why this thesis added the description, otherwise it would be confusing because you do not know what the code would refer to. With this coding scheme specific words or sentences were chosen to be focused on.66_{The themes explain what this paper wanted to} look for and find information about and the codes explain the more specific ideas that is stated in the material regarding the themes. Given that this thesis is doing a deductive approach this will affect the coding scheme, as it is grounding the themes based on earlier research about sovereignty.67 This can also be called concept-driven coding and I am doing this because I already know the themes that I am interested in.

Internal and external sovereignty, were regarded as being important as themes in the coding scheme because they made comparison between the two countries easier and gave it more depth. These two dimensions made it possible to make a deeper analysis with sovereignty. Having these two themes with their respective qualities were useful in analysing the material to see how much these different aspects of sovereignty manifests themselves in the material. After the unit of analysis was selected this thesis created themes and defined categories, this thesis conducted two pilot sessions where it pre-tested the categories thus their definitions and rules. After doing this through two pilot sessions, this thesis assessed the reliability and validity if there was a high consistency it would go on, if not it would revise the coding rules. If a revision was needed the revised altered coding scheme was pre-tested and then used to code all the data. After this an assessment of the reliability and validity was done. These steps were inspired by Content analysis: Method, applications, and issues by Barbara Down-Wamboldt.68

Coding scheme

Theme

Code Number Code

Description of the codes

Internal

Sovereignty

1.

2.

3.

4.

5.

6.

Right to local autonomy/ autonomy in its political organisation.

Availability to natural resources/land

Right to own resources

Right to decide on own culture /own language at meetings

Right to consultation

Right to help other organisations with money

Is there anywhere in the text that mentions autonomy

That the Sami are given access to natural resources/land

That the Sámediggi can gather its own resources or if it delegated from the state

Mention anything about a right to decide on cultural questions?

Mention anything about a right to consultation?

Right to give resources to other organisations?

66_{Schreiers, Qualitative Content Analysis}_{p. 176-177.}

67_{Get the Matic, Coding qualitative research,}_{https://getthematic.com/insights/coding-qualitative-data/}

(14)

13

7.

8.

9.

10.

No to local autonomy/ self determination

No to natural resources

No to own resources

No to a right of consultation

Mentions that they do not have a right to self determination when it comes to the choice of questions, they can work with.

Mention anything about local autonomy

Mentions that they do not get to have own deciding over their money anything about rights to own resources

Mention anything of a right to consultation

External

sovereignty

11.

12.

13.

14.

15.

16.

International law

Authority and legitimacy

Self-governing

No international law

No authority and legitimacy

No self governing

Mentioning to international law and practices.

Mentioning of the authority and legitimacy of the state.

The state is free to govern its own territory.

No mention to international law and practices.

No mention to the state’s authority and legitimacy.

No mentioning to the right to self government.

Motivation of method

The method of textual analysis with a deductive approach is common when studying texts of different types within qualitative research due to its flexibility and simplicity. It allows the researcher to test theoretical issues, understand data better and content analysis makes it possible to “distil words into fewer content-related categories69_{. This method of using content} analysis with a deductive approach does have it sets back. It could for example mean that I miss something. Since my thesis is interested in exploring how sovereignty differs between Norway and Sweden, a quite specific subject and that the aim is a condensed and broad description of the phenomenon, the method is relevant.70

69_{Kyngäs & Elo, The qualitative content analysis process, p. 108} 70_{Ibid, p. 108.}

(15)

14

Critical examination of the method

A weakness is that it this method cannot be without subjectivity. The method is useful to understanding the material, but it cannot give the entire picture because it is limited by a deductive approach. This deductive approach is reductive, and this becomes important when one analysis complex texts.71 As mentioned earlier subjectivity has an effect, meaning that the results of the material analysed might not be the same as someone else’s. It is possible that my opinions will shape the analysis. This method can also disregard the context that proceeded the analysed material.72 Reliability and validity are concerns for these types of studies, how to counter this is to show how this thesis reached its conclusions, to be completely transparent in the coding and analysis of the material.

Chapter 4: Material

The materials of this paper are founding documents of the creation of the Sámi parliaments in Norway and Sweden and the law propositions that preceded them. The rationale for utilizing both the law propositions and the founding documents was because the amount of data was quite small, totalling to about 18 pages when it came to the founding documents of both countries. With the law propositions there is more data regarding the specifics of the founding documents, including more background information to certain decisions and as to why the government made those specific laws.

The empirical materials that this thesis will analyse is the Act of 12 June 1987 No.56 concerning

the Sameting (the Sámi parliament) and other Sami legal matters (the Sami act), ot.prp.nr.33 (1986-1987) om lov om sametinget og andre samiske rettsforhold (sameloven) which is the law

proposition to the Sámi parliament in Norway. In Sweden the material to be analysed is

Sveriges Riksdag. 1992: 1433 which is the founding document to the Sámi parliament in

Sweden and Regeringens proposition 1992/93: 32 om samerna och samisk kultur m.m. which is the law proposition to the Sámi parliament in Sweden. Having the founding documents and the actual law propositions are important to this thesis because it will show the actual power that the Sámi parliaments are given, their rights, protections and duties. These documents will be important to analyse from the theoretical framework and the analysis questions given that it is sovereignty that will be used to analyse these documents it was thought useful to use government documents. These documents show the governments intentions and sovereignty is about how governments act within and outside of their countries. This thesis went through the parts of the text that were relevant for this paper and was thorough on these parts, but this does create questions regarding why it chose to look at some parts and not others.

The analysis will be primarily focus on the sections which discuss about the tasks and structures of the Sámi parliament and the motivation behind that in the material and not about how the voting and election system goes about in both parliaments because this thesis deemed it not to

71_{Carol Busch, Paul S. De Maret, Teresa Flynn, Rachel Kellum , Sheri Le, Brad Meyers, Matt Saunders, Robert White, and Mike Palmquist..} Content Analysis, p. 19.

72_{Carol Busch, Paul S. De Maret, Teresa Flynn, Rachel Kellum , Sheri Le, Brad Meyers, Matt Saunders, Robert White, and Mike Palmquist..} Content Analysis, p. 19.

(16)

15

be something that could be connected to sovereignty as strongly. It is also important to mention that these are my translations of the documents which can have an impact.

It must be mentioned that this analysis section will focus on parts in the material that can be applied to the coding scheme my analysis questions were built for, and this is because this paper chose to do a deductive based content analysis which was deemed to be the most effective given that it was about 400 pages of material and because it was more reasonable given that sovereignty a specific subject was to be analysed. A potential effect of this is that things that could have been interesting were perhaps left out of the analysis meaning that there is material that has been left out, parts about how the parliament is elected an such was deemed not to be relevant for the paper and was left out. As mentioned earlier it could have perhaps been that if this paper only did analysis of the actual law propositions this would have been easier because of the few number of pages that had, but this was deemed not good because arguably these founding law documents did not bring up the arguments to why certain decisions were made, and this was most important to this thesis because otherwise it would be far more speculation which is not desirable.

Chapter 5: Analysis

This section is intended to present the results of this thesis. These results are the product of the empirical material that have been analysed through a deductive content analysis approach. The two sections of the analysis will be internal sovereignty and external sovereignty.

Internal sovereignty

Sweden: Regeringens proposition 1992/93

In Sweden, when looking at the introduction of the content in the law proposition Regeringens

proposition 1992/93 it is stated that it is recommended to create a Sámi parliament that is to be

a certain type of government agency that is to monitor questions that are related to Sámi culture.73_{In the first sentence of the second chapter of the law proposition it is stated that the} Sámi parliament is to work for a living Sami culture and with that take initiative to activities and give recommendations to actions that will promote said culture.74 It is later stated on the same page that the Sámi parliament is recommended to be a government agency and that the state will take suggestions from the Sámi parliament on who should be the chairman in the parliament, but ultimately something the state will chose.75_{Here we can see that the Sámi} parliament is denied the right to choose its own chairman, this can be explained by internal sovereignty. Internal sovereignty is about the acknowledged relationship between the citizens

73_{Proposition 1992/93: 32 om samerna och samisk kultur (propositionens huvudsakliga innehåll) p. 1.}

74_{Proposition 1992/93: 32 om samerna och samisk kultur (propositionens huvudsakliga innehåll), p. 1.}

(17)

16

and the state and this acknowledgment legitimates government through the exercise of authority, power, and law.76 Krasner in his book discusses about how domestic sovereignty is about the formal organisation of political authority within the state and the ability of authority to effectively exercise control with their own polity.77_{With these things in consideration this} thesis makes the analysis that the Sámi parliament given that they shall not interfere with the internal sovereignty and this causes that they do not get to choose a chairmen because this could perhaps be seen as something to autonomous if they got to choose their own chairmen of their parliament perhaps. It is later stated in the law proposition that the Sámi parliament shall act for a living Sámi culture and by that take initiative to those activities and propose measures that will help with this culture.78 The primary thing that the Sámi parliament is to work with is the distribution of governments funds to Sámi culture and to Sámi organisations and other ways that help all Sámi.79 How internal sovereignty plays a role here is that as mentioned earlier is that sovereignty is about acknowledgement to the government and legitimacy and effectivity to exercise power and authority, when you converse about sovereignty it’s not just about have ultimate control about over things political it is also about having authority to relegate activities and practices to the economic, social and cultural.80 With sovereignty, states do not simply have ultimate authority over things political; “ they have the authority to relegate activities, issues, and practices to the economic, social, cultural, and scientific realms of authority or to the states' own realm-the political”.81_{Here we see that they are relegating activities to the Sámi parliament} as part of their internal sovereignty, the Swedish state.

In Regeringens proposition 1992/93 there is a discourse about the constitution of Sweden, it is said that in the constitution the Sámi are already given protection as an ethnic minority so additional protection that would increase their rights is therefore not necessary.82 This was because it was declared that this law change would be designed as a protection against landowners one-sided command over land and water within reindeer husbandry areas that conflicted with Sámi interests. This would thus be a matter of regulating the legal relationship between landowners and the Sámi people.83 This would then also give a protection from actions by the public law to the Sámi through laws and ministry actions, it is stated that the protection the constitution gives is for the public and this was deemed that protection for individual rights against attack from other individuals in most cases was already taken care of through normal law.84 Here we can again see a case for how internal sovereignty plays a role in the rights that the Sami have, that the Swedish state does not want to give special rights to the Sámi as a people. Indigenous people are subject to arbitrary decisions made by the dominant society and this is best seen through a system of asymmetric power, self-determination that is seen as non-domination challenges the language of modern constitutionalism as stated earlier in the theory

76_{Prokhovnik, Internal/external: The state of sovereignty, p. 9.} 77_{Krasner, Sovereignty: organized hypocrisy, p. 4.}

78_{Proposition 1992/93: 32 om samerna och samisk kultur (Propositionens lagförslag 1 förslag till sametingslag 2 kap. sametingets}

uppgifter), p. 4.

79_{Ibid, p. 4.}

80_{Thomson, State sovereignty in international relations: Bridging the gap between theory and empirical research, p. 214.} 81_{Ibid, p. 214}

82_{Proposition 1992/93: 32 om samerna och samisk kultur (Anmälan till proposition om samerna och samisk kulutr m.m. 3. samerna i} regeringsformen), p. 29.

83_{Proposition 1992/93: 32 om samerna och samisk kultur (Anmälan till proposition om samerna och samisk kulutre m.m 3. samerna i} regeringsformen), p. 31

(18)

17

section.85 If we are to apply this theory of sovereignty regarding the Sámi people’s rights in Sweden, we can see why special rights were not given. Regarding autonomy and the idea of self-determination for the Sámi parliament ideas of internal sovereignty can be seen clearly here as well. In Regeringens proposition 1992/93 when it is mentioned that even though it is called a parliament it is not a body of self-determination that will function instead of the Swedish parliament or a municipal council nor that it will compete with these, the Sámi are Swedish citizens that will participate in municipal and parliamentary elections like all other Swedish citizens. In the law proposition within the sub-protocol by the ministry of education it is stated that it would be utterly sad if a part of Sweden’s population would divide from the country’s regime and political life86. Here we can see clearly that the quote “sovereignty over the same territory cannot reside simultaneously in two different authorities, that is, sovereignty is indivisible”, is noticeably clear given that the Swedish government does not want to share power. 87 We see that the theory of internal sovereignty that it is indivisible plays a strong role, it is clearly stated that the Sámi parliament is not a body of self-determination that it will not compete against the Swedish government. “I would like to emphasize the fundamental importance of this body for Sami issues having the status of a state authority under government under public law,”this statement also adheres to what has been discussed previously in the paper. 88

Further on in Regeringens proposition 1992/93 it is mentioned that the Sámi parliament decides when ordinary meetings will take place.89_{In the section about the Sámi parliaments boards and} committees, the Sámi parliament will choose board of maximum 7 members of the parliament.90 Lastly about the parliaments handling of cases the government can overrule the decisions of the Sámi parliament given certain situations.91 Here we can see though that differently from before that now the parliament is given a semblance of self-determination because they are allowed to decide on their day to day work and that they the Sámi parliament gets to choose who sits on the board from its parliament and this does goes against what was earlier stated about internal sovereignty. How it goes against is that internal sovereignty is about the absolute authority within the state and within this organisation there is autonomy to its choice of members. But going back to internal sovereignty it still plays a role because the Swedish government can overrule certain matters.

Sweden: Sametingslag (1192:1433)

In the first part of sametingslag (1192:1433) the law it is stated that The Sàmi parliament main objective is to monitor questions that touch upon Sámi culture in Sweden”.92_{Included in the} Sámi parliament’s tasks is to work for a living Sámi culture and take initiative to activities and propose measures that will promote said culture. The Sámi parliament can give economical

85_{Mörkenstam, Recognition as if sovereigns? A procedural understanding of indigenous self-determination p. 638} 86_{Proposition 1992/93: 32 om samerna och samisk kultur (4. ett sameting som statlig myndighet) p. 34.} 87_{Morgenthau, The problem of sovereignty reconsidered, p. 350.}

88_{Proposition 1992/93: 32 om samerna och samisk kultur(4. ett sameting som statlig myndighet), p. 34.} 89_{Proposition 1992/93: 32 om samerna och samisk kultur (2 kap. sametingets uppgifter), p. 5.} 90_{Ibid, p. 5.}

91_{Ibid, p. 5.}

(19)

18

grant and other types of support to the groups, political parties or likewise associations that are or have been represented by the Sámi parliament.93 The government decides if these grants can happen or not because to see if they are improper or not.94_{In the section about the composition} of the Sámi parliament after a recommendation of the Sámi parliament the government decides on the chairmen of the parliament, the chairmen is to be chosen by the parliaments members, but the Sámi parliament decides when ordinary meetings take place.95 Finally, the Sámi parliament and its boards decisions can be appealed during certain situations96. Here we can see that certain things that were brought up in the law proposition got actualised through the Sámi parliament law. In the introductory statement the word “monitor” is used for the main objective of the Sámi parliament, questions that are related to Sámi culture, and that it shall propose measure that will promote said culture. Internal sovereignty can explain the vagueness of the Sámi parliaments actual power and why most things that seem to be what are rights are actually stated if it is allowed by the government can be explained by internal sovereignty. Internal sovereignty is about the internal affairs of the state, and then who has the power within it, the internal sovereign has the ultimate power, and the final independent authority and this is binding to all citizens.97 When considering that in internal sovereignty as it has been shown earlier the legal status of the sovereign can be seen as its constitutional independence, it needs to have legal authority to govern its own territory.98 Without this legal authority it cannot be sovereign, and therefore it is not giving any real power to the Sámi parliament. Lastly the idea of some shared of parallel sovereignty within a state challenges the norm, a norm that nations have power in interpreting and institutionalising political rights, and if this gets challenged it erodes the de facto autonomy of the nation-state.99

Norway: ot.prp.nr.33 (1986-1987) om lov om sametinget og andre samiske rettsforhold (sameloven)

The Norwegian law proposition, that will be analysed below, will be called by its name:

ot.prp.nr.33 for its Sámi parliament through a lens of internal sovereignty. In the introductory

segment in the law proposition to the Norwegian government it is said that it is important to say that the Sámi are a separate ethnic group, a group that has lived in the geographical area before the Norwegian state was formed.100 It goes on to say that the Sámi peoples culture is a threatened culture and that it is the Norwegian states responsibility to make sure that the Sámi people are well equipped to secure the continued existence of said culture so that the Sámi can exist as a separate people in the future.101 In conclusion it is stated that for a Sámi ethnicity to exist it cannot do this without a certain degree of special measures for the Sámi people. These

93_{1992:1433 Sametingslag p. 2.} 94_{Ibid, p. 2}

95_{Ibid, p. 2} 96_{Ibid, p. 2}

97_Heywood,_{Political Theory}_{. p. 92.}

98_{Eckes, The reflexive relationship between internal and external sovereignty p. 43.}

99_{Mörkenstam, Recognition as if sovereigns? A procedural understanding of indigenous self-determination p. 645.} 100_{Ot.prp.nr.33 (1986-1987) om lov om sametinget og andre samiska rettsforhold (sameloven) p. 6.}

(20)

19

special measures that are deviations from the formal equality between citizens is seen as something necessary to secure a real equality between the Sámi culture and other cultures in the Norwegian society.102_{In the proposition it is stated that the Sámi parliament shall be an} advisory authority, and that it has to be able to speak and issue an opinion in all questions within its work area on its own initiative and that its work areas shall be economical, cultural, judicial and social questions and questions that touches the administration of natural resources that are particularly connected to the Sámi people.103 Here we find something that is different from the theories of internal sovereignty that has earlier been introduced and discussed, in the Norwegian law proposition the Sámi parliament itself gets to speak on areas under its own initiative in things it considers is connected to Sami culture and that it works with the administration of natural resources. With this we see a degree of autonomy and self-determination, if the relationship between the dominant society and the indigenous population can be seen as an asymmetric relationship where one lives at the mercy of the other, self-determination is seen as non-domination and that this challenges the language of modern constitutionalism.104 It would seem then that the Norwegian government is going against its own internal sovereignty slightly. Because the classical view of sovereignty is that the final authority over all legal matters within a specific bounded territory is conceived in terms of non-interference.105 This means that no agent can interfere with decisions made by the sovereign state, which is being done in a slight way.106_{This get more clearly seen when the proposition adds that the Sámi culture cannot be} saved by mere regulatory measures and because of this it’s the government’s responsibility to create conditions that can secure and further develop the Sámi culture on its own terms in the to the extent it desires. On this basis the Sámi should have a great amount of autonomy and influence in questions that are particularly interesting for the Sámi cultures position107 and that according to ot.prp.nr.33 (1986-1987) om lov om sametinget og andre samiske rettsforhold

(sameloven) the Sámi themselves that have an active role in the design of various measures

when it comes to working with certain questions that are of special interest for the Sámi people.108 Later in the proposition it is stated that the Sámi parliament is to be an advisory authority but that it must be possible for it to have decision making capabilities when it comes to use of public funds for specific purposes109 and it is not mentioned that it is limited in certain capacities. Here we see a minor infraction in internal sovereignty as well, within sovereignty there is the authority to relegate activities such as practices to the economical.110_{Here the} Norwegian state is giving up some if its authority in a minor way. Lastly what this thesis wanted to bring up about the law proposition is that according to what has been earlier stated about internal sovereignty the Sámi parliament has an ability to form detailed rules for its own internal structure, but this will be limited by rules and laws about general requirements for how matters are dealt with of public bodies that are described in the law.111

102_{Ibid, p. 6}

103_{Ot.prp.nr.33 (1986-1987) om lov om sametinget og andre samiska rettsforhold (sameloven) p.12.}

104_{Mörkenstam, Recognition as if sovereigns? A procedural understanding of indigenous self-determination page 638}

105_{Ibid, p. 638.}

106_{Ibid, p. 638.}

107_{Ot.prp.nr.33 (1986-1987) om lov om sametinget og andre samiska rettsforhold (sameloven) p. 23.} 108_{Ot.prp.nr.33 (1986-1987) om lov om sametinget og andre samiska rettsforhold (sameloven) p. 18.} 109_{Ot.prp.nr.33 (1986-1987) om lov om sametinget og andre samiska rettsforhold (sameloven) p. 12-13.}

110_{Thomson, State sovereignty in international relations: Bridging the gap between theory and empirical research p. 214.}

(21)

20

Norway: Act of 12 June 1987 No.56 concerning the Sameting (the Sámi parliament) and other Sami legal matter (the Sami Act).

Now on to the actual law about the Sámi parliament by the name: Act of 12 June 1987 No.56

concerning the Sameting (the Sámi parliament) and other Sami legal matter (the Sami Act). In

the introductory segment of the act it is said that: “the purpose of the act is to enable the Sami people in Norway to safeguard and develop their language, culture and way of life”.112_The business of the Sámi parliament as stated in the act is any matter in the view of the parliament that particularly affects the Sami people, and that on its own initiative raise and say opinions on any matter within the scope of Sami business, and on its own initiative refer matters to public authority and private institutions.113 Here as in the law proposition we see things regarding internal sovereignty that are slightly against the theories that have been presented, here the Sámi parliament is given freedom on their own initiative to act in any matter they view is affects the Sami people they are given the power to act according to what they see fit, here we have a government body that has a form of autonomy in how it goes about its business, they are though not allowed make any laws and they are an advisory body which can be explained with internal sovereignty, this is because in internal affairs internal sovereign has the ultimate power and it is binding to all citizens.114_{As mentioned in the law proposition the Sámi parliament “may} delegate authority to administer the allocations granted for purposes of the Sami people over the annual fiscal budget”, but now it is stated that the ministry will law down rules for how they may manage their financial management in the Sameting115_{and this then coincides with that} within sovereignty there is the ultimate authority, and it has the power to relegate economic activities which it does here.116 Finally it is stated that other bodies in the Norwegian state should give the Sámi parliament a chance to express their opinion before they make a decision on something that could come within the scope of the business of the Sámi parliament.117 Here we see that there isn’t a complete ultimate authority of the state as internal sovereignty explains, even though it is not law required it is stated though in the law that the government should give the Sámi parliament a chance to express its opinions on things that fall within what they deem are Sami matters, which is a form subservience and this is interesting because ideas of shared sovereignty within a nation challenges the norm that nations have the power in interpreting and institutionalising political rights in the nation-state.118“The Sameting is to have its own administration. Administrative staff are to be appointed by the Sameting”119. This further proves that the Sámi parliament is given autonomy over its own administration.

112_{Act of 12 June 1987 No. 56 concerning the Sameting (the Sami parliament) and other Sami legal matters (the Sami Act)}

113_{Act of 12 June 1987 No. 56 concerning the Sameting (the Sami parliament) and other Sami legal matters (the Sami Act)} 114_Heywood,_{Political Theory}_{. p. 92.}

115_{Act of 12 June 1987 No. 56 concerning the Sameting (the Sami parliament) and other Sami legal matters (the Sami Act)} 116_{Thomson, State sovereignty in international relations: Bridging the gap between theory and empirical research p. 214.} 117_{Act of 12 June 1987 No. 56 concerning the Sameting (the Sami parliament) and other Sami legal matters (the Sami Act)} 118_{Mörkenstam, Recognition as if sovereigns? A procedural understanding of indigenous self-determination p. 645.} 119_{Act of 12 June 1987 No. 56 concerning the Sameting (the Sami parliament) and other Sami legal matters (the Sami Act)}

(22)

21

External Sovereingty

Sweden: Regeringens proposition 1992/93 and Sametingslag (1192:1433)

Sweden’s external sovereignty can be seen through both Regeringens proposition 1992/93 and

sametingslag (1192:1433) for the Sámi parliament. In Regeringens proposition 1992/93 it is argued that why this law should be made is because it is for the Sámi culture to help it, that there are already different type of organisations but a more powerful instrument for the promotion of the Sámi peoples culture and its development for this there should be a special government agency with an overview over these type of questions, provided that the Sámi themselves want to be active in this type of organisation.120 In the proposition it stated that this kind of solution, having a Sámi parliament will be the bedrock for the engagement from the Sámi, it has wide support and it has already been very successful in Norway.121_{Here we see} something of Sweden’s external sovereignty, the fact that they are mentioning other countries is a symbol of that. In external sovereignty, it is about practices that are associated with the mutual recognition between territorial entities.122_{this type of sovereignty concerns issues of} authority and legitimacy, it not about control.123 That they are mentioning other countries in this proposition can be seen as them trying to gain external sovereignty in this law by showing its potential on the international scene and this can be more clearly illustrated when the law proposition mentions that the international year for indigenous populations is the year 1993, which is around the time this law was proposed, the UN:s general assembly decided the 18th of December 1990 that 1993 would be the international indigenous population year, the point of the year was to strengthen the international cooperation to fix the indigenous peoples problems on areas like human rights, the environment and others.124 It is stated in the protocol that because of this, the Swedish government has given the assignment to the chief of the ministry of education to make a delegation with the mission that in consultation with the indigenous population and voluntary organisations to suggest themes and activities during the “international year for the worlds indigenous.125_{In another section of the protocol they discuss} about how the international work in respect to the indigenous populations situation and rights come to the fore when you are working with human rights, it is said that Sweden is a part of many conventions that are about human rights and in these conventions the situation of the indigenous population and rights are a part of and observed.126 Here, like the earlier introduced example of external sovereignty we can see even clearer now how the wish for legitimacy is important. External sovereignty is about legitimacy, if rulers facilitate international accords this offers the possibility for rulers to secure external resources and these resources could enhance their ability to stay in power and promote things to their constituents and at the same time recognition makes you immune against both civil and criminal actions.127

Lastly, there is a section regarding ILO: s convention (nr 169) about indigenous populations and tribal people in autonomous countries. The minister’s conclusion is that Sweden should not

120_{Proposition 1992/93: 32 om samerna och samisk kultur, (4. ett sameting som statlig myndighet), p. 33-34.} 121_{Proposition 1992/93: 32 om samerna och samisk kultur, (4. ett sameting som statlig myndighet), p. 34.}

122_{Krasner, Sovereignty: organized hypocrisy, p. 3.} 123_{Krasner, Sovereignty: organized hypocrisy, p. 4.}

124_{Proposition 1992/93: 32 om samerna och samisk kultur p. 29.} 125_{Ibid, p. 29.}

126_{Proposition 1992/93: 32 om samerna och samisk kultur p. 28.}

Sweden, Norway, and Sovereignty : A comparative work of the ideals of sovereignty between Norway and Sweden and how their respective perspectives can explain differences in Sámi rights.

Department of Political Science