jats:p The recent case by Girija Sámeby against the Swedish State, asserting its exclusive right to hunt and fish, has ignited many conversations. While the favourable treatment of the Sámi claim by the Supreme Court has elicited celebratory responses, the case has been considered a moment of reckoning for the broader Indigenous rights framework in Sweden. The initial claim by the Girija reindeer herding community that it had the exclusive right not only to hunt and fish but also to lease such a right to others has made its way to the Supreme Court and is now affirmed. Unsurprisingly, the court, faced with an unprecedented challenge of determining the remit of rights in the commercial realm, has fallen back on known doctrines, such as ‘immemorial prescription’, to resolve the case. Nonetheless, the underlying concerns for Indigenous rights over land, self-determination, sovereignty, and the postcolonial reconciliation process remain to be examined within and outside juridical spaces. Although recognition of Indigenous voice has witnessed some progress in the realm of the executive and the legislature, the judiciary is yet to develop a progressive jurisprudence concerning Indigenous culture, economic, and social rights. The Girija Sámeby case may well be the first of its kind where the judiciary is proactive in recognising the changing nature of Indigenous autonomy, self-determination, and economy. </jats:p>