The 2009 Greenland Self-Government Act: Autonomy, Identity, and the Rewriting of a Constitutional Relationship

Introduction

In June 2009, Greenland entered a new constitutional era with the coming into force of the Greenland Self-Government Act. More than a technical legal reform, the Act represented a profound rebalancing of power between Greenland and the Kingdom of Denmark, a redefinition of Greenlandic identity within international law, and a carefully staged pathway toward potential independence. The Act was the culmination of decades of political struggle, cultural revival, and constitutional experimentation, and it stands today as one of the most far-reaching autonomy arrangements granted to an Indigenous-majority territory within a democratic state.

Unlike earlier reforms, which framed autonomy primarily as administrative decentralization, the 2009 Act embedded the idea that the people of Greenland constitute a people under international law, with the right to self-determination. This conceptual shift transformed self-government from a delegated privilege into an inherent right. At the same time, the Act maintained a pragmatic balance: it preserved the unity of the Danish Realm while allowing Greenland to assume responsibility over an expanding range of policy areas at its own pace.

Historical Background: From Colony to Home Rule

Greenland’s constitutional journey cannot be understood without reference to its colonial past. For centuries, Greenland was administered by Denmark as a colonial possession, governed through a centralized system that limited local political participation and subordinated Greenlandic culture and language. This arrangement began to change after the Second World War, as decolonization gained global momentum and Denmark reassessed its relationship with the territory.

In 1953, Greenland’s formal status as a colony ended when it was incorporated into the Danish Constitution as an integral part of the Kingdom. While this move abolished colonial status in legal terms, it did not grant meaningful self-rule. Political power remained concentrated in Copenhagen, and policies of modernization often marginalized traditional livelihoods and Greenlandic language.

The push for greater autonomy gained strength in the 1960s and 1970s, fueled by global Indigenous movements and local resistance to externally imposed development strategies. A key catalyst was Denmark’s entry into the European Economic Community in 1973, which included Greenland despite strong local opposition. The controversy highlighted the democratic deficit in Greenland’s governance and intensified demands for self-determination.

These pressures led to the establishment of Greenland Home Rule in 1979. Home Rule created a locally elected parliament (Inatsisartut) and government (Naalakkersuisut), granting authority over a wide range of domestic matters, including education, health, and fisheries. However, sovereignty remained firmly with Denmark, which retained control over foreign affairs, defense, the legal system, and monetary policy. Home Rule also rested on the assumption that autonomy was delegated by the Danish state, not derived from an inherent right of the Greenlandic people.

By the late 1990s, this framework was increasingly seen as insufficient. Greenlandic society had matured politically, and there was a growing consensus that Home Rule did not adequately reflect Greenland’s status as an Indigenous people with a distinct language, culture, and historical identity. The idea of self-government, rather than home rule, emerged as the next logical step.

The Road to the Self-Government Act

The process leading to the 2009 Act was marked by negotiation, consultation, and popular participation. In 2000, a joint Greenlandic-Danish commission was established to explore possibilities for enhanced autonomy. Importantly, the commission operated on the premise that reform should be grounded in mutual agreement rather than unilateral decision-making.

The commission’s work culminated in a comprehensive proposal that reimagined the constitutional relationship between Greenland and Denmark. Central to this proposal was the recognition of Greenlanders as a people under international law, a move that aligned the reform with global norms on self-determination, particularly those articulated in United Nations instruments concerning Indigenous peoples.

Public legitimacy was secured through a referendum held in Greenland in November 2008. An overwhelming majority voted in favor of self-government, signaling broad societal support. The Danish Parliament subsequently approved the Act, and it entered into force on 21 June 2009, a date symbolically chosen to coincide with Greenland’s National Day.

The combination of bilateral negotiation and popular ratification distinguished the Self-Government Act from earlier reforms. It was not merely a legislative adjustment imposed from above, but a constitutional compact endorsed by the people most affected.

Core Principles of the Act

At the heart of the Self-Government Act lies a set of principles that redefine Greenland’s constitutional status. The most significant is the explicit recognition that the people of Greenland constitute a people with the right to self-determination under international law. This provision does not itself declare independence, but it establishes a legal and moral foundation upon which independence could be pursued in the future.

The Act also affirms that Greenlandic is the official language of Greenland. While Danish remains widely used, particularly in higher education and administration, this symbolic and practical elevation of Greenlandic reinforces cultural autonomy and addresses the historical marginalization of Indigenous language.

Another foundational principle is subsidiarity. The Act is designed to allow Greenland to assume responsibility for new policy areas gradually, as institutional capacity and political will permit. This flexible approach avoids the risks associated with sudden transfers of authority while preserving a clear trajectory toward greater self-rule.

Transfer of Powers and Responsibilities

One of the most concrete aspects of the Self-Government Act is its detailed framework for transferring competencies from Denmark to Greenland. The Act distinguishes between areas that are immediately transferred, areas that may be transferred upon request, and areas that remain under Danish authority unless a fundamental constitutional change occurs.

Upon the Act’s entry into force, Greenland assumed responsibility for a broad range of additional policy fields, including policing, courts, and natural resource management. Control over mineral and hydrocarbon resources was particularly significant, as it positioned Greenland to benefit directly from any future resource development.

Other areas, such as aviation, family law, and company law, can be transferred incrementally through negotiations between the Greenlandic and Danish governments. This mechanism allows Greenland to expand its autonomy in line with administrative readiness and economic sustainability.

Certain core sovereign functions, including foreign affairs, defense, citizenship, and monetary policy, remain with Denmark. However, even in these areas, the Act provides for consultation and cooperation, ensuring that Greenlandic interests are represented in decisions that affect the territory.

Economic Arrangements and Financial Autonomy

Economic considerations played a central role in shaping the Self-Government Act. Greenland’s economy has long been characterized by a narrow productive base and heavy reliance on an annual block grant from Denmark. While this financial support has underpinned public services and social welfare, it has also raised concerns about dependency.

The Act retains the Danish block grant but links its future to Greenland’s assumption of new revenue sources, particularly from natural resources. As Greenland earns income from mineral extraction, the block grant is to be reduced correspondingly. This arrangement creates a direct incentive for economic development while avoiding abrupt fiscal shocks.

Importantly, revenues from non-renewable resources are defined as belonging to Greenland. This provision reinforces the principle that Greenlandic self-government includes control over the territory’s economic foundations. At the same time, it places responsibility on Greenlandic authorities to manage resources sustainably and equitably.

The financial model embedded in the Act reflects a delicate balance: it acknowledges current economic realities while encouraging long-term self-sufficiency.

International Law and the Question of Independence

Perhaps the most far-reaching implication of the Self-Government Act lies in its treatment of international law. By recognizing Greenlanders as a people with the right to self-determination, the Act implicitly acknowledges the legal possibility of independence.

The Act outlines a clear, peaceful procedure for such a transition. Should the people of Greenland decide to pursue independence, the decision must be made through a referendum. Negotiations with Denmark would then determine the terms of separation, including the division of assets and liabilities. Final approval would require consent from both the Greenlandic and Danish parliaments.

This framework demystifies independence by embedding it within legal process rather than revolutionary rupture. It also underscores that independence, if pursued, must rest on democratic legitimacy and mutual agreement.

At the same time, the Act does not predetermine the outcome. It leaves open the possibility that Greenland may choose to remain within the Danish Realm indefinitely, exercising extensive autonomy without full sovereignty. In this sense, the Act is as much about choice as it is about direction.

Cultural and Social Dimensions

Beyond its legal and economic provisions, the Self-Government Act carries deep cultural significance. For many Greenlanders, it represents official recognition of a long-suppressed identity and historical experience. The elevation of Greenlandic language and the acknowledgment of Indigenous status are not merely symbolic gestures; they shape everyday governance, education, and public discourse.

The Act also influences how Greenlandic society understands itself. Self-government has fostered a stronger sense of political responsibility and collective agency. Decisions about development, welfare, and environmental protection are increasingly framed as Greenlandic choices, rather than outcomes imposed from outside.

At the same time, self-government has brought new challenges. Greater autonomy requires administrative capacity, skilled personnel, and political consensus. Debates over resource extraction, social inequality, and environmental protection have intensified, reflecting the complex trade-offs inherent in self-rule.

Arctic Geopolitics and Global Significance

The 2009 Act must also be understood within the context of Arctic geopolitics. As climate change transforms the Arctic, Greenland’s strategic importance has grown dramatically. Melting ice has increased access to shipping routes and natural resources, drawing the attention of global powers.

Self-government strengthens Greenland’s voice in this evolving landscape. While Denmark continues to represent the Realm in international forums, Greenland participates directly in Arctic cooperation bodies and has established a growing diplomatic presence. The Act provides a constitutional basis for this engagement, ensuring that Greenlandic perspectives shape policies affecting the Arctic.

From a global perspective, the Act stands as a model of negotiated autonomy. It demonstrates how states can address Indigenous self-determination through legal reform rather than conflict. While Greenland’s circumstances are unique, the principles underlying the Act resonate far beyond the Arctic.

Critiques and Ongoing Debates

Despite its achievements, the Self-Government Act has not been free from criticism. Some argue that the continued Danish control over key sovereign functions limits the practical scope of self-determination. Others question whether the economic model, particularly reliance on resource extraction, is compatible with environmental sustainability and traditional livelihoods.

There are also debates within Greenlandic society about the pace and desirability of independence. While the Act provides a pathway, opinions differ on whether economic and social conditions are ripe for such a step. These debates underscore that self-government is an ongoing process rather than a final settlement.

Conclusion

The 2009 Greenland Self-Government Act represents a remarkable constitutional achievement. It redefined the relationship between Greenland and Denmark by grounding autonomy in the right of self-determination, expanding Greenland’s control over its own affairs, and providing a peaceful, democratic pathway toward potential independence.

More than a legal document, the Act is a statement of identity and intent. It reflects Greenland’s journey from colony to self-governing society and affirms the capacity of negotiated reform to address historical injustice. As Greenland continues to navigate the challenges of economic development, cultural preservation, and global change, the Self-Government Act remains a foundational reference point—both a product of past struggles and a framework for future choices.