Home Rule In Greenland

Home Rule was implemented in Greenland in 1979.

Home Rule in Greenland

In Canada's Eastern Arctic and Greenland, the Inuit have been the majority for centuries. In recent years, they have been given a promise from Canadian and Danish governments that offers them more responsibility for their lands and thus control over their lives without fear of being outnumbered by outsiders. The Arctic Promise looks at how much the Inuit vision of self-governance relates to the existing public governance systems of Greenland and Nunavut, and how much autonomy there can be for territories that remain subordinate units of larger states. By means of a bottom-up approach involving cultural immersion, contextual, jurisprudential, and historical legal comparisons of Greenland and Nunavut, The Arctic Promise examines the forms, evolution, and scope of the right to autonomy in these Arctic jurisdictions. Loukacheva argues that the right to autonomy should encompass or protect Inuit jurisdiction in legal systems and the administration of justice, and should allow the Inuit direct participation in international affairs where issues that affect their homelands are concerned. The Arctic Promise deals with areas of comparative constitutional law, international law, Aboriginal law, legal anthropology, political science, and international relations, using each to contribute to the understanding of the right to indigenous autonomy.

This book traces Danish-Greenlandic relations in the period 1900-2000. The main trend is the development from a colonial situation in 1900 with a state owned company runnig nearly all business to an open economy with steadily growing self-government for Greenland short of full independence. The Danish policy can be described as benevolent, but financially the budget was tight until after the second World War, the philosophy being that Denmark should neither lose nor gain. After the war there was heavy investment to bring Greenland nearer to standards of living comparable to Denmark and substantial subsidies were given make that happen. The Greenlanders attitude towards Denmark developed along lines familiar from other examples of decolonisation. The first phase of accepting the coloniser was long over, now seeking equality with the coloniser was the main aim in their endeavours. From 1911 two provincial councils woiced speaking the Greenlanders views and their political influence steadily grew. In 1953 Greenland got representation in the Danish parliament. The third phase of doing without the coloniser began in the early 1970s when Greenlanders sought home rule status, obtained in 1979. In the following twenty years the Home Rule Authority gradually took over nearly all lawmaking and administration and from 2004 a committee has explored ways of giving Greenland a more independent voice in foreign affairs. In 2003 the ultimate goal was declared to be full independence.

With the Constitution of 1953, the colonial status of Greenland came to an end, and Greenlanders were granted equal rights as citizens within the Danish realm. In 1954 this new arrangement was supported by the UN General Assembly. The decision to change Greenland's status was conditioned both by internal and external circumstances. In the UN context, Danes increasingly felt the strain of being a colonial power, and they feared the possibility of future UN interference in Greenlandic affairs.

Popular illustrated account of the first ten years (1979-1989) of Home Rule, or independence from Denmark, in Greenland.

What are the Faroese and the Greenlanders? Are they peoples in their own right, indigenous peoples or Danish minorities? And what is their status under international law? Do they have the right to national self-determination? And if so, what does this right include? This volume describes the constitutional history of the Faroes and Greenland, it analyses the current international status of the two countries and compares it to countries in similar situations, and looks at how Denmark has administered the sovereignty of its dependencies. It thus sheds new light on a constitutional arrangement that by some is described as, democratic, creative and imaginative, and by others is deemed colonial. But the book also deals with the status of non-sovereign polities and the right to self-determination in general, as well as with the current attitude of the UN towards such matters. It thus offers insights which can be of value for other countries, struggling with the issue, as well as scholars working in this field.