Repparfjord mining waste deposits should be suspended following a Norwegian Supreme Court ruling that invalidated the legal basis for a similar disposal permit in Førdefjord, according to Norway’s Sámi Parliament (Sametinget).
The elected assembly representing the Sámi people has asked the Norwegian government to intervene and halt the permits allowing mining company Nussir to deposit waste from its planned copper mine in Repparfjord, in the northern county of Finnmark.
In an official letter sent to several government ministries, the Sámi Parliament argued that the permits issued for the projects in Førdefjord and Repparfjord were granted at around the same time and are legally almost identical.
“The error that led to the invalidity of the permits for disposal in Førdefjord, together with the associated mineral extraction, also applies to the permit under the Pollution Control Act and the Minerals Act in Repparfjord,” the assembly wrote.
Repparfjord mining waste permit faces new scrutiny
The demand follows a Supreme Court ruling issued on 17 June 2026 concerning the Engebø mining project beside Førdefjord, in western Norway.
The Court found that the reasoning used to approve the project’s marine waste disposal permit did not meet the requirements of the EU Water Framework Directive. The permit was therefore considered invalid.
The directive applies in Norway through the European Economic Area and requires governments to prevent the deterioration of rivers, lakes, groundwater and coastal waters. Exceptions are possible, but authorities must demonstrate that strict legal conditions have been met.
The Norwegian government has started a new assessment of the Engebø permit. However, it has allowed the company operating there to continue depositing waste while an application for a temporary permit is considered.
The EFTA Surveillance Authority (ESA), which monitors Norway’s compliance with European Economic Area rules, has also asked the government whether the Supreme Court ruling could affect the permit granted to Nussir in Repparfjord.
Government says the two fjords are not automatically comparable
Minister of Climate and Environment Andreas Bjelland Eriksen, from the Labour Party (Arbeiderpartiet), said the government would first examine the implications of the ruling for the Engebø project.
“The judgment concerns the Engebø case and does not address possible discharges into Repparfjord,” Eriksen said. “We will now first assess how to follow up the judgment in the Engebø case. If we find that it has consequences for other cases, we will follow this up.”
The ministry has therefore rejected the argument that the two permits must automatically receive the same legal treatment.
In its correspondence with ESA, however, the ministry acknowledged that the Repparfjord authorisation may need to be reconsidered if its review of the Supreme Court ruling identifies wider consequences for other marine disposal permits.
The dispute could consequently depend on how closely the environmental assessments and legal justifications used in the two cases resemble each other.
A copper mine in a national salmon fjord
Nussir has received permission to develop a copper mine near Repparfjord, in the municipality of Hammerfest. The project includes plans to transport processed mining waste through a pipeline and deposit it on the seabed.
Repparfjord is classified as a national salmon fjord, a designation intended to provide additional protection for important wild salmon populations.
When the government approved the area plan for the project, it argued that mining could generate employment and economic activity in Finnmark. Authorities nevertheless recognised possible effects on marine ecosystems and required environmental monitoring of the disposal site.
The project has faced long-standing opposition from environmental organisations, fishers and Sámi reindeer-herding communities.
The planned mine and its infrastructure affect areas used for reindeer grazing and migration. These activities are an important part of Sámi culture and livelihoods. The government previously required the developer to discuss measures intended to reduce the consequences for affected reindeer-herding districts.
For the Sámi Parliament, the dispute therefore concerns both environmental protection and Indigenous rights. Its intervention could strengthen demands for Sámi interests to receive greater weight when mining permits are reviewed.
Strategic minerals and Indigenous rights
Copper is considered a strategic raw material under the EU’s Critical Raw Materials Act. European demand is expected to rise as electricity networks, renewable energy systems, electric vehicles and defence industries expand.
Norway is not an EU member, but its mineral resources form part of the wider European debate about reducing dependence on imports and increasing domestic extraction.
The Repparfjord controversy illustrates the tensions within that strategy. European governments want to secure access to materials needed for the green and digital transitions, while environmental legislation requires new projects to avoid unacceptable damage to ecosystems and water quality.
Mining projects in northern Scandinavia also frequently overlap with territories used for traditional Sámi livelihoods. This has raised questions about whether the expansion of European mineral production risks transferring part of the environmental and social cost of the transition to Indigenous communities.
The government’s assessment of the Førdefjord judgment could now determine whether Nussir’s permits remain valid or require a new legal and environmental review. A broader interpretation of the ruling could affect not only Repparfjord, but the standards applied to future mining projects across Norway.
