A/HRC/33/42/Add.3 conservation, but also mineral exploitation. In that regard, the Environmental Code regulates how conflicts between different classifications of national interest, for example reindeer husbandry and the prospects of economic gain from mineral extraction, should be resolved. According to the Environmental Code, when such interests collide, the State should give precedence to the interest that best promotes long-term sustainable use of land and water and take ecological, social, culture and economic factors into account. 24 45. The Special Rapporteur heard significant concerns about the balancing of interests that is called for in the Environmental Code. In practice, the weighing of interest is rarely done and when it does happen, relevant State bodies appear to routinely assess reindeer herding exclusively from an economic perspective and balance it against the State’s interest in job creation and State revenue from mining activities. Sami representatives shared their concerns about the sequencing of the process, as the weighing of interests takes place at a late stage of the permit process, when the relevant extractive companies’ and local politicians’ expectations about a new mine are already high. 46. The Special Rapporteur notes that under international standards and comparative legal practice, the State’s expropriation of lands traditionally used by Sami communities, whether the lands have been officially titled or not, constitutes a limitation of their property rights and can be justified only if such a limitation is pursuant to a valid public purpose. Such a valid public purpose cannot be found in mere commercial interests or revenueraising objectives (see A/HRC/24/41, para. 35). In the view of the Special Rapporteur, a balancing of interests as foreseen by the Environmental Code, where traditional Sami livelihoods are weighed against possible economic gain only, is not in line with the international human rights obligations and commitments that the State has assumed with respect to indigenous peoples. 47. In addition, the Special Rapporteur notes the lack in the legal framework regulating mineral extraction in Sweden of any specific requirements for fair and equitable benefitsharing with Sami communities. 4. Rönnbäck mine 48. During her visit, the Special Rapporteur visited the site of the planned mining complex in Rönnbäck, located in the heartland of the Vapsten Sami village’s traditional territory. The project has generated heated public debate nationally and gained attention internationally. Community members expressed concern to the Special Rapporteur that the proposed mining activities would destroy key areas within their traditional territory that are indispensable for the continued pursuit of their traditional livelihood. They said that their tolerance was fast reaching breaking point as they are already competing for their land with several other interests, including industrial logging, roughly 800 windmills and 2 mines. In addition, 80 applications for exploration concessions on their traditional territory are currently being considered. Despite appeals, the decision to grant the concession for the Rönnbäck mine was upheld by the Government in August 2013 and further sanctioned by a decision of the Supreme Administrative Court in October 2014. In its decision, the Government acknowledged that Sami reindeer husbandry rights were constitutionally protected, but that restrictions on those rights were nonetheless permitted in cases where it was in the public interest. In the Rönnbäck mine case, the State considered that the public interest had been met in the form of substantial economic gain. 25 In 2013, the Vapsten Sami village lodged a complaint with the Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination, which in October 2013 requested Sweden to suspend all mining activities 24 25 Ibid., sect. 10. See the decision of the Government (Regeringsbeslut) of 22 August 2013. 13