Sami self‐determination in the making? *

. The article discusses whether principles of territorial or non‐territorial jurisdiction ought to guide the future distribution of decision‐making power between the Norwegian Sami Parliament and the Norwegian Parliament. It argues that an acceptable distribution of powers must satisfy two normative criteria: first, decision‐making power ought to be distributed on the basis of individuals' desire to be politically associated with some people rather than with others. Second, a normatively defensible distribution of decision‐making power must ensure that those who are subject to the jurisdiction of a particular body have the right to vote in elections for, and thus have the possibility to affect the composition of, that particular body. The article concludes that a non‐territorial principle for distribution of decision‐making power provides a more fruitful point of departure for discussions of the future status of the Sami Parliament in the Norwegian political system than do notions of territorial jurisdiction.