CRC/C/97/D/172/2022 transferring Sami culture to Sami children is becoming increasingly difficult because as many as 70 per cent of all Sami children live outside the Sami homeland. The Committee takes note of the State party’s claim that the exploration works would be relatively small in scale and temporary and would thus not have far-reaching effects that would cause reindeer husbandry to collapse. 9.4 The Committee takes note of the authors’ claim that their rights have been violated because the international standard of free, prior and informed consent was not complied with when the Safety and Chemicals Agency granted the exploration permit within their traditional territory and when the Supreme Administrative Court upheld the decision to grant that permit. Pursuant to the Mining Act, the permit holder is required only to adjust its operations in order to avoid significant harm to reindeer herding, and the authors were merely given an opportunity to be heard during consultations. 9.5 The Committee takes note of the State party’s claim that there is no breach of the Convention because it has complied with the Mining Act: the authors were consulted before the granting of the permit, an extensive hearing process was conducted, whereby mutual agreement was reached to prevent the dispersal of the reindeer, and the exploration permit decision included several conditions to reduce the harm caused by mineral exploration to reindeer herding (see para. 6.3 above). 9.6 The Committee also takes note of the authors’ claim that they suffer discrimination by not being recognized as owners of their traditional lands and by not being treated differently from the non-Sami population, with the State party ignoring the particularities of Sami cultural identity, traditional livelihoods and dependence on reindeer herding for survival. The Committee also takes note of the State party’s claim that the applicable legislation is not discriminatory, as it applies to both Sami and non-Sami, and that determining the owner of the lands is ultimately a private law issue. 9.7 The Committee observes that, due to the specificities of the communication, the authors’ claims are interrelated, the granting of the mineral exploration permit in their traditional lands, allegedly without effective participation, having allegedly had multiple consequences for the enjoyment of their rights. 9.8 The Committee observes that both parties agree on the following facts: (a) the three authors, from a traditional semi-nomadic herding community, are trying to learn traditional Sami reindeer herding, passed down from their ancestors, and are determined to continue the Sami way of life in which they grew up, despite outside threats to their culture; (b) Sami reindeer herding is a cornerstone of the Sami culture and way of life; and (c) the authors’ culture, identity, livelihood and mother tongue (Northern Sami) are strongly dependent on traditional reindeer herding. 9.9 The Committee further observes that it has not been contested by the State party that the winter months are the most critical for the survival of reindeer and, therefore, for traditional Sami reindeer herding; and that the authors and their siida are permanently fighting for the survival of their culture. 9.10 The Committee observes that the element in dispute between the parties is linked to the effects of mineral exploration on reindeer herding, in particular whether the drilling of 100- to 300-metre-deep holes into the bedrock in about 20 different locations within an area of 390 hectares in the heart of the authors’ traditional reindeer herding territory would have temporary or, on the contrary, long-lasting effects on their distinct culture. According to the authors, the effects of the works, disrupting the herding in the critical winter months in the scarce winter herding pastures, on the composition of the herd would be long-lasting, limiting their ability to benefit from the transmission of the Sami culture and the associated work and livelihood. According to the State party, the works would be temporary and relatively small in scale. 9.11 The Committee acknowledges the State party’s assertions: (a) that the right of Indigenous Peoples to self-determination served as a model for the Constitution of Finland; (b) that it recognizes the need to strengthen the current obligation under its legislation to negotiate, to ensure closer alignment with the international standard of free, prior and informed consent; and (c) that the case law on article 27 of the International Covenant on 12