The dispute was over an area of land in Anárjohkdalen in Karasjok municipality, right up to the border with Finland. The villagers in Angeli said that they had harvested from the open fields without particularly caring about the land border, which follows the river Anárjohka. The use was so long and extensive that it gave them the right of ownership, they believed. On Thursday, the decision came from the Norwegian Foreign Affairs Court: A flat no to all Finnish demands. The Norwegian landowner Stig Harby also claimed ownership of large parts of the open field. He too was refused. This means that Finnmarkseiendommen (FeFo), which owns the land today, has won the case on all points. The losers are the taxpayers. It is the state that covers all legal fees in such cases. In these two cases, they amount to a total of NOK 6.1 million. Plaintiff Stig Harby during the inspection with the Norwegian Foreign Affairs Court. Harby was not successful in any of his demands. Photo: FEFO Long dispute over Finnmark The court case is part of the long and complicated settlement about who actually owns the land in Finnmark. Today, Finnmarkseiendommen owns 95 per cent, but it is up for reassessment, municipality by municipality. (See fact box.) The right to land in Finnmark Statskog was the land owner in Finnmark for a long time. The work of the Sami Committee resulted in the Finnmark Act – so that the Finnmarkings themselves took over the land through the company Finnmarkseiendommen (FeFo) in 2005. In addition, the historical use of the entire county was to be examined. On the basis of that, one had to find out who had acquired right of use and ownership, whether it was Sami or others. This job is done by the Finnmark Commission. Their decisions may mean that FeFo does not own the land after all. The cases can be appealed to the Utmarksdomstolen and possibly further to the Supreme Court. Two cases (about Nesseby and Stjernøya) have already been before the Supreme Court. In January, Karasjok municipality – 5,453 square kilometers, i.e. more than Akershus – will be assessed in an extensive court case. Two different groups demand local ownership. One wants all residents to own the municipality, the other believes that only the Sami have this right. Several smaller claims from other groups and private individuals have been cleared in advance. Unlimited use The demand from the Finnish village with around 60 permanent residents was initially only about the right of use – i.e. the right to hunt, fish, graze, log and so on – to 270 square kilometers on the Norwegian side of the border. The Finns believed that Angeli and Basevuovdi on the Norwegian side were in practice the same village. They had used the same field for 150 years. – We have never made any difference between Norwegians and Finns, we never used those words. People on both sides of the border saw themselves only as Sámi, said Ilmari Länsman in the border village to news. Ilmari Länsman and his fellow villagers did not succeed with their claims in Norwegian law. Photo: Torgeir Varsi / news Their claim was first dealt with in the so-called Finnmark Commission. It concluded that people who were permanent residents of the Finnish village had right of use on the Norwegian side. Landowner FeFo refused to accept the outcome. Then the Finns went to trial with a tougher demand: instead of right of use, they now demanded full ownership. However, the Utmarks Court concluded that people had largely stayed on the side of the border where they lived. Moreover, the disputed area was so large, and the population of Angeli so small, that they could not have been dominant in the area anyway. Thus, they have neither the right of use nor the right of ownership, according to the Utmarksdomstolen. This means that the court disagrees with both the Finnmark Commission and half the board of FeFo. The three representatives appointed by the Sami Parliament – Line Kalak, Máret Guhttor and deputy Inger Marie Gaup Eira – would accept that the Finns had the right to hunt, catch, pick berries and fish on the Norwegian side. It was the double vote of chairman Kurt Wikan that ensured that the finnmarkingen now retain the rights themselves. Plaintiffs Stig Harby and Erik Sundland from Finnmarkseiendommen during inspection of a hay marsh west of Vuolitjárjávri, to which Harby claimed ownership. Photo: FeFo Zero support In contrast to the Finns, the private landowner Stig Harby did not receive support when his case was first brought before the Finnmark Commission. Harby is from Alta, but lives in Switzerland. He has bought two farms in the valley, and believed that the previous owners had used open fields and several mowed marshes as if they owned the area. He therefore summoned FeFo to court with a claim for property rights to around 5 square kilometres. The judges completely disagree. They believe that the previous owners were far from alone in using the area. Moreover, one of them had worked for the state as a hunting supervisor, so he was familiar with the legislation and knew that the state was the rightful landowner, the court believes. The judges rejected all claims by Harby. The extensive judgment is 53 pages long and thoroughly reviews the history of the area on the border with Finland. Especially interested? Read the full judgment here
ttn-69
Finnish villagers demanded a piece of Karasjok – but lost in court – news Troms and Finnmark
