CCPR/C/124/D/2668/2015 in the electoral roll. The proposed text is largely similar to the corresponding provision of the initialled Nordic Sami Convention. Another proposed modification provides for an obligation for State authorities to cooperate and negotiate with the Sami Parliament on certain matters that may affect the status of the Sami; however, this would not imply that the Sami Parliament has a right to veto decisions by other bodies. 4.7 Modifications to the procedures for inclusion on the electoral role are also being proposed. These include a proposal for an extension of the time limits for seeking inclusion in the electoral roll, to allow sufficient time for considering applications and possible requests for review by the Election Committee. An independent and autonomous review committee, comprising a chair who is legally trained and three members, would be created to review the decisions of the Election Committee in case of appeal. The review committee’s decisions could be appealed to the Supreme Administrative Court. The goal is to have the amendments to the Act on the Sami Parliament enter into force in sufficient time before the next Sami Parliament elections, to be held in 2019. The Sami Parliament has not yet considered the current draft, and the Government will not proceed without the Sami Parliament’s consent. Author’s further explanations 5.1 By letters dated 23 February 2017, 28 July 2017, 13 April 2018 and 3 August 2018, the author responded to the Committee’s request for further clarifications. 5.2 The author first emphasizes that she submitted the communication on her own behalf and on behalf of the members of the Sami indigenous people in Finland, as authorized by the Board of the Sami Parliament. This authorization follows the criteria established by the jurisprudence of the Committee in Lubicon Lake Band v. Canada.8 She therefore requests the Committee to take into account the individual and collective dimensions of the case, as well as her right to represent all members of her group. 5.3 Any communications submitted by another individual concerning the same conduct by the State party does not affect the author’s right to present a communication or her right to represent other members of her group. 5.4 In view of the Committee’s admissibility decision, the author modifies her request for an effective remedy and requests that such remedies include: (a) a public apology for the violations of the rights of the author and the Sami indigenous people to nondiscrimination, to political participation and to enjoy their own culture interpreted in the light of their right to self-determination; (b) immediate discontinuation of ongoing legislative, treaty-making or administrative processes that would significantly affect the rights and interests of the Sami indigenous people where the free, prior and informed consent of the Sami has not been obtained; (c) immediate initiation of an amendment to section 3 of the Act on the Sami Parliament, towards defining the criteria for eligibility to vote in Sami Parliament elections in a manner that respects the right of the Sami people to exercise self-determination and that limits the external judicial review by State courts of decisions taken by the organs of the Sami Parliament to situations where a decision has been arbitrary or discriminatory; (d) compensation of the Sami Parliament for the legal fees it paid as a result of the ruling of 13 January 2016; (e) compensation of the Sami Parliament for its own legal expenses involved in litigation in matters pertaining to the 2015 elections. 5.5 The author argues that the State party does not refer to the two most recent concluding observations issued by the Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination, in which that Committee considered that the rulings of the Supreme Administrative Court gave insufficient weight to the self-determination of the Sami people.9 5.6 With respect to the process for drafting amendments to the Act on the Sami Parliament, the current proposal satisfies the Sami. This process would partially remedy the author’s claims for Covenant violations, but would not end the ongoing effects of these violations. In fact, by submitting information on the proposed changes to the Act, the State 8 9 GE.19-04714 Communication No. 167/1984, paras. 13.4, 14 and 33. CERD/C/FIN/CO/20-22, para. 12 and CERD/C/FIN/CO/23, para. 15. 7