tho.. riCjJhtl. A. thll prohibition for the half-Sarni i. contrary to international and dome.tie law, the 1928-1971 .tatute i. invalid and cannot forbid the half-Sarni trom e.erelaing hi. reindeer br•• di~g, hunting and fiehinCjJ riCjJht.. A. a matter of fact, the half-Sarni have exercJ.ed their huntinCjJ and filhinCjJ right., especially filhinCjJ righte, without the permi •• ion required by statute. Thi. hae been common in the Swedi.h Sarni heartland. and was volid until the ReCjJerinCjJsratten rendered it. decieion on 6 June 1985 in the Ivan lCitok case ••• Kitok's pOlition is that he i. denied the right to enjoy the c'.llture of the Sarni a. he 11 jUlt a half-Sarni, whereaa the Sarni village member£ are full Semi ••• The Sw,di.h Government has admitted that reindeer bnuu~.t.n9 i. an e ••,.ntial element in the Sarni culture. When Sweden now cout8111i~ that the majority of the Swedieh Sarni have no .pecial riCjJhts under tbo e~~~tinCjJ law, this is not true. Sweden CjJoes on to .ay 'these other Sarni hav~ lcund it more difficult to maintain their Sarni identity and many of them are today assimilated in Swedish society. Indeed, the majority of this group doeM not even live within the area where reindeer-herdinCjJ Sarni live'. Ivan Kitok comments that he speaks for the estimated 5,000 Sarni who live in the Swedish Sarni heartlands and of whom only 2,000 are lomehy members. The mechanism of the somoby ••• diminishes the number of reindeer-farminCjJ Sarni from year to year; there are now only 2,000 persons who are active somety members livinCjJ in Swedieh Sarni heartlands. When Sweden says that thes~ other Sarni are assimilated, it seems that Sweden confirms its own violation of article 27. "The important thinCjJ for th~ Sarni people is solidarity arnong the people (fglksolidaritet) and not industrial solidarity (nAring8801idaritet). This was Lhe qreilt appeal of the Sarni leaders, Gustaf Park, IS1ael RuonCjJ and others. Sw~den has tried hard, however, to promot~ indu8trial solidarlty among the Swedish Sarni and to divide them into full Sarni and half-Sarni ••• It is characteristic that the 1964 Royal Committee wanted to call the Lapp villaCjJe 'reindeer village' (r'nbY) and wanted to make the ronby an entirely economic association with Increasing voting power for the big reindeer owners. This has also been achi.ved in the pres~nt som.by, where members get a new vote for every extra 100 reindeer. It is because of this organisation of the voting power that Ivan Kitok was not admitted into his fatherland Sorkaitum Lappby. "Among the approximately 3,000 non-somoby members who are entitled to carry out reindeer fa1'ming and live in Swedish Sarni heartland thtare are only a few today who are Joterested in taking up reind.er farming. In order to maintain the Sarni ethnic-linguistic minority, it is, however, very important that such Sami are encouraged to join the Jiarnehy." 5.4 In conclusion, it is stated that the author, as a half-Sarni, "cannot flmjoy his own culture because his reindeer-farming, hunting and fishing rights can be removed by an undemocratic graduated vote and as a half-Sarni he is forced to pay 4,000 to 5,000 Swedish krona annually as a fee to the Sorkaitum a.omJIkY. auociation that the full Sarni do m t pay to that associ8tion. This is a stigma on half-Sarni." 6.1 Before considering any claims contained in a communication, the Human Rights Committee must, in accordance with rule 87 of its proviGional rules of procedure, decide whether or not it is admissible under the Optional Protocol to the Covenant. -227-