E/C.12/76/D/251/2022 E/C.12/76/D/289/2022 Communication No. 289/2022 12.4 On 16 March 2022, the company Element 92 Suomi Oy submitted to the Safety and Chemicals Agency a request to reserve 284 km² in Kova-Labba Siida for the purpose of surveying the area for battery minerals (nickel, copper and cobalt). On 20 April 2022, the Safety and Chemicals Agency granted the reservation for a period of two years, renewable for one more year. The authors were not contacted at any point in the process of the granting of this reservation. The authors did not file any domestic remedies, since it had been established in the case law of the Supreme Administrative Court that a reservation decision did not affect the practice of reindeer herding or restrict the right of the Sami as an Indigenous People to maintain and develop their culture and that the Sami did not have legal standing to appeal against the granting of a reservation. 12.5 The Committee considers that the issue before it is to determine whether the granting, despite the authors’ consistent opposition and in the absence of an impact assessment, of an exploration permit (communication No. 251/2022) and the granting of a reservation (communication No. 289/2022) in respect of areas on their traditional territory without obtaining their free, prior and informed consent, in the context of ongoing climate change and the cumulative effect of other interferences with reindeer herding, constitute a violation of the authors’ right to take part in the cultural life of their community (art. 15 (1) (a)), read alone and in conjunction with articles 1, 2 (2) and 11 of the Covenant. General considerations 13. The Committee concurs with the State party that human rights treaties are living instruments.11 The Committee will, therefore, read the Covenant in the light of the evolving interpretation of the rights of Indigenous Peoples, as reflected in relevant general comments of the Committee. Article 15 (1) (a), read alone and in conjunction with articles 1, 2 (2) and 11, of the Covenant 14.1 The Committee notes that the authors are Indigenous Sami persons and practise reindeer herding on their traditional territory, which is an essential part of Sami culture and livelihood and has been transmitted from generation to generation. This is uncontested by the State party. The Committee considers that the aforementioned elements can be considered to fall within the scope of the right to take part in the cultural life of the community, as enshrined in article 15 (1) (a) of the Covenant, and the right to an adequate standard of living, as provided for in article 11 of the Covenant. 14.2 The Committee recalls its general comment No. 21 (2009), in which it notes that article 15 (1) (a) of the Covenant recognizes the right of all persons to exercise their cultural practices and way of life and that, in the case of Indigenous Peoples, the value of the communal dimension of cultural life should be taken into account (paras. 49 (a) and 36, respectively). The Committee also recalls that the right to take part in the cultural life of a community includes traditional economic activities, such as reindeer herding and fishing, as a means of subsistence,12 which has a bearing on the right to an adequate standard of living. The Committee further recalls that the communal dimension of Indigenous Peoples’ cultural life, including traditional activities, is closely linked to their traditional lands, territories and resources, and is indispensable to their existence, well-being and full development.13 The Committee recalls its general comments No. 21 (2009) and No. 26 (2022), in which it notes that article 15 (1) (a) of the Covenant enshrines the inalienable right of Indigenous Peoples to the lands, territories and resources that they have traditionally owned, occupied or otherwise used or acquired.14 In this respect, Indigenous Peoples’ cultural values and rights 11 12 13 14 GE.24-18518 Human Rights Committee, Roy et al. v. Australia (CCPR/C/137/D/3585/2019), para. 8.14; European Court of Human Rights, Tyrer v. the United Kingdom, Application No. 5856/72, Judgment, 25 April 1978, para. 31; and Inter-American Court of Human Rights, Mayagna (Sumo) Awas Tingni Community v. Nicaragua, Judgment, 31 August 2001, para. 146. Human Rights Committee, general comment No. 23 (1994), para. 7. General comment No. 21 (2009), para. 36. Ibid.; and general comment No. 26 (2022). 13