The three Nordic states of Finland, Norway and Sweden have all established a Sámi Parliament, consisting of popularly elected Sámi representatives. The electorates of these Sámi Parliaments are defined ethnically: one must to be registered in the Sámi electoral register to have the right to vote. The response to indigenous rights claims was thus similar in the Nordic countries. The political systems of the Nordic countries are also generally regarded as similar, and the Sámi of the Nordic countries is one people divided by national borders. There are nevertheless considerable differences between the Nordic Sámi parliaments.
In this paper, we will describe and compare two of these institutions: the Norwegian and Swedish Sámi Parliaments. The two parliaments differ with regard to (at least) six aspects: a) both Sámi and Norwegian parties participate in the Norwegian Sámi Parliament elections, but only Sámi parties field candidates in the Swedish case; b) Norway’s Sámi Parliament elections take place in seven constituencies, while the whole country is a single constituency in Sweden; c) voters can choose between candidates as well as lists in Sweden, while personal votes have no effect in Norway; d) the Sámi Parliament Act in Sweden contains guidelines for specific administrative tasks, while the Norwegian Sámi Act is open ended; e) Norway has the most influential organ, in comparison to the weaker and less autonomous Swedish parliament; and f) the work of the Swedish Sámi Parliament has been, to a greater extent, hampered by political deadlock.
The main aim of the paper is to map and describe these differences, but we also aim to discuss two questions: Why are the two parliaments different? And how may these differences affect the Sámi Parliaments’ position and function within the two nation-states and the Sámi communities?
