CERD/C/102/D/54/2013 to own, use, develop and control lands, territories and resources that they possess by reason of traditional ownership or other traditional occupation or use, and recalling that this definition has been endorsed by the Committee in its general recommendation No. 23 (1997), the Committee found that the petitioners’ claims raise issues related to article 5 (d) (v), as well as articles 5 (a) and 6 of the Convention. The Committee requested the parties to submit written observations and comments concerning the merits of the communication. For further information about the facts, the petitioners’ claims, the parties’ observations on admissibility and the Committee’s decision on admissibility, refer to Lars-Anders Ågren et al. v. Sweden (CERD/C/92/D/54/2013). State party’s observations on the merits 2.1 In a submission dated 16 October 2017, the State party observes that the communication reveals no violation of the petitioners’ rights under the Convention. In its submission, the State party first refers to its legislation governing the granting of mining concessions and the Sami’s collective reindeer husbandry right, among others; secondly, it applies those provisions to the facts of the present communication; thirdly, it concludes with observations on the merits. Relevant national legislation 2.2 The granting of mining concessions is regulated under the Minerals Act and the Environmental Code. Applications for exploitation concessions are submitted to the Chief Mining Inspector together with an environmental impact statement describing possible effects of the planned operations on people, animals, plants, land, water, air, climate, landscape, cultural environment, human health and environment. The environmental impact statement must also include an analysis of the effects on reindeer husbandry, if relevant, and an outline of the possible cumulative impact of the operations applied for and other activities. When the concession applied for is in an area that is of national interest for the purposes of both reindeer husbandry and mineral extraction, the examining authority must determine which interest is to be given priority: national interest for the purpose of mineral extraction is understood by the State party as the interest of protecting areas that contain valuable substances and minerals against measures that may substantially obstruct their extraction, and national interest for the purpose of reindeer husbandry is the interest of protecting areas that are important for reindeer husbandry against measures that may substantially obstruct its operation. According to the State party, affected property owners and other parties concerned are informed of any application for exploitation concessions, provided with the environmental impact statement and given the opportunity to object. After an exploitation concession is awarded, environmental permits and construction permits are required. The Land and Environment Court is competent to examine applications for environmental permits and to determine the conditions, terms and limitations to be placed on the operations. 2.3 The Reindeer Husbandry Act regulates the Sami’s land rights and their collective reindeer husbandry right. The collective reindeer husbandry right is an entitlement of the Sami people based on immemorial usage, which is exercised through membership of a Sami village. According to the legislation, persons other than Sami can have land rights in Sami reindeer husbandry areas, based on tenancy, lease or easement. 2.4 The State party also explains that, under the law, individuals can be compensated for the violation of their fundamental rights and legal provisions exist against discrimination whereby no unfavourable treatment of anyone belonging to a minority group by reason of ethnic origin, colour or other similar circumstances is permissible. Clarifications concerning the facts of the communication 2.5 The State party makes some amendments and additions to the facts summarized by the Committee in its decision on admissibility. In this regard, the State party recalls the consultations held between the mining company and the members of the Sami village, which encompassed: (a) a preparatory meeting and a site visit (in June 2008); (b) an overview of the Vapsten Sami village’s needs and another site visit (in November 2008); (c) a first draft of a report on the current state of the project, produced in June 2009; (d) a second draft of the report, produced on 10 October 2009; and (e) the final report on the current state of the project, 3