Even though indigenous peoples’ human rights have become an integrated component of in-ternational law and policy over the past three decades, indigenous people still face a range of human rights violations. Previous research has criticized human rights law in terms of their impact, the process of development and how states observe them, as well as what human rights are. This case study and content analysis focus on exploring different actors’ perspec-tives on The Nordic Saami Convention, a joint proposal between Finland, Norway, and Swe-den made to maintain and strengthen existing international law for Sámis’ rights. This in terms of its content, the process of developing the convention, and the possible outcome. It also brings forward how these views connect to theoretical perspectives of human rights in order to increase our understanding of them. The study shows that there is no overall consen-sus on what the content of the convention should include, how the process of its development should look like, and what the possible outcome of the convention is. However, the study showed that there are similarities between some actors on certain theoretical perspectives on human rights since some actors shared views and could be coupled together. The conclusion of this study is that even though there are different perspectives; they are somewhat connect-ed, both in their similarities and differences. This show that, by increasing our understanding from the theoretical perspectives of human rights and if all perspectives of the affected actors are taken into consideration, a solution that benefits all affected by and/or involved with the convention might become possible. If this happens The Nordic Saami Convention might be one instrument to strengthen the Sámi people’s human rights.