Is it possible to provide an argument that justifies indigenous claims to specific land and resources? Should indigenous peoples be compensated for the historic injustice they have suffered or should there be moral statutes of limitations on injustice? Can culture ground land claims? The main purpose of this thesis is to investigate the moral justification of indigenous claims to specific land and resources. The way in which this will be done is by looking at the claims in relation to two different approaches. The first approach is concerned with rectificatory justice. What is at stake here is an acknowledgement of the historic injustice but a claim that the injustice has been superseded. The situation has changed since the time of the injustice and it may be possible to argue that indigenous peoples have lost their claims to compensation. I look at several pragmatic arguments in the literature that seek to defend this claim. The second approach is based on an individual right to culture. I will argue that an assimilation of an indigenous group – successful or not – is morally problematic because an individual has a right to her specific culture. The thesis will show that there is strong connection between land and indigenous cultures. In order to get closer to an argument that may be able to justify indigenous land claims the idea of shared interest and their ability to ground group rights will be discussed in relation to indigenous cultures’ dependency on specific land and resources.