Sanningskommission för Sveriges samer : en studie om förväntningar och andra urfolks erfarenheter på väg mot upprättelse

Sammanfattning: In recent years the field of reparations for indigenous peoples has increased remarkably. Past wrongs made by states in the distant past has become more important to highlight, not only because of the memories of historical injustice, but because of how the past impacts the future, and not least, still appears as structures of discrimination remaining from the past.   As an indigenous people the Saami people living in Sweden have experiences of both historical injustices as well as todays struggle with discrimination on different levels. Mostly regarding their right to be a part of decisions concerning them and the right of culture, language, identity, land and nature resources, fundamental for them as a people. In order to change their situation and to search for redress the Saami people in Sweden have announced their need of a truth commission. The Saami people are not the first indigenous people whom search for redress through a truth commission, but is it possible to learn from others?   With this in mind, my study aim to look at practical experiences of truth commissions in Canada and New Zealand and further, examine what the Saami people in Sweden hope to achieve with a truth commission. Thereafter, I weight other indigenous peoples experiences of a truth commission with the Saami peoples expectations to find out what keys need to be considered to increase the outcome of a truth commission. Where theory, practical experience and Saami expectations connects is where the key issues can be found. Given this, my study suggests that five different key issues must be thought through and shall not be underestimated as they may have an effect on the ongoing process as well as on the results and the aftermaths. The key issues that is suggested is as follows: 1) political will, 2) the role and engagement of Civil Society, 3) the Saami´s own involvement 4) the problem of what focus the commission should have, and 5) the awareness of “tough” questions coming up.