MEDIA VIEW - SURINAME FACES ITS TROUBLED PAST

UNCLAS SECTION 01 OF 02 PARAMARIBO 000450

SIPDIS

C O R R E C T E D C O P Y ADDING SLUG LINE

SIPDIS

DEPT FOR WHA/CAR - LLUFTIG

DEPT FOR WHA/OAS - JMAISTO

E.O. 12958: N/A
TAGS: PHUM PGOV PREL OAS NS
SUBJECT: MEDIA VIEW - SURINAME FACES ITS TROUBLED PAST

PARAMARIBO 00000450 001.4 OF 002


REFTEL: 05 PARAMARIBO 000575

1) (U) SUMMARY: The following editorial comments on
Suriname's progress in coming to terms with its troubled
period of military dictatorship in the 1980s. The
editorial appeared in Dagblad Suriname, a local daily with
a circulation of 13,000, the day before President Venetiaan
was to preside over a ceremony marking his government's
compliance with a 2005 Inter-American Court on Human Rights
ruling against the Government of Suriname. (See reftel)
The judgment resulted from a case brought by a local human
rights group, "Moiwana 86," formed in 1987 to seek justice
for the gross and systematic human rights violations during
the period of military rule, after successive Surinamese
governments failed to respond to their requests to
investigate and prosecute. The group took its name from a
1986 incident from Suriname's interior wars, when a
national army unit massacred at least 39 residents of the
N'Djuka village of Moiwana, located about 75 kilometers to
the east of Paramaribo. It discusses the political
sensitivities of dealing with a dark incident from
Suriname's history, as the key figures from the opposing
sides of the 1980s interior wars, Desi Bouterse and Ronnie
Brunswijk, sit as political leaders in today's parliament.
In congratulating the GOS for so doing, it enjoins it to
move forward next with the December murders trial against
among others Bouterse. END SUMMARY

2) (U) BEGIN TEXT OF EDITORIAL

Apologizing Publicly is No Humiliation

It is to the credit of this Government to execute the
judgment of the Inter-American Court of Human Rights of
June 15, 2005. The Government is working on executing the
various parts of the judgment, but already there have been
complaints about the slow pace at which the Government is
moving. The Court found Suriname in violation of six
articles of the Inter-American Convention on Human Rights;
this puts Suriname in a bad light, but also reflects badly
on the Surinamese people. It is a good thing that human
rights violations are condemned in the world of today.

The Court's judgment costs our country millions of dollars
(an estimated 5 million USD),money that we could have used
for the development of Suriname. Besides the public apology
to the community of the N'Djuka village, the State was
ordered to pay a total amount of US$ 1,690,000 to the
victims; the 130 survivors will receive compensation for
material and moral damages. A fund of US$ 1.2 million has
to be established for community development of the N'Djuka
village. The Government also has to investigate the
massacre and prosecute the responsible persons.

What is very strange about this situation is that those
responsible or at least those with a main role in the
massacre are currently members of the Parliament. Two main
figures: Brunswijk and Bouterse are very popular in
Suriname and are respectively, the Political leaders of A-
Combination and the National Democratic Party, parties
which have 20 of the 51 seats in Parliament. A-Combination,
which has 5 seats, is currently in the ruling coalition. Up
to now, nothing has been said about the investigation of
the Moiwana massacre, indeed a very sensitive issue in
politics in Suriname.

On July 15, the President will publicly apologize on behalf
of Suriname to the Moiwana community for the killings by a
unit of the National Army on 29 November 1986. The man who
was the military commander during that period is currently
the Political leader of the NDP, the biggest political
party in Suriname, and was chosen by the people to
represent them in the Parliament. What a dilemma for the
President. He cannot invite the two to join him on July 15
when he will be in the Moiwana village. The internationally
motivated judgment came about because consecutive
governments did not investigate what exactly transpired on
November 29, 1986 and who was responsible for killing the
innocent villagers. And still we are being very careful.
The constitutional state is recovering, but is still very
fragile. The current Minister of Justice and Police and the
Attorney General lead this process of recovery, and we
should not underestimate the load on their shoulders
especially if we take into account the counter forces.

Executing the judgment of the Inter-American Court of Human
Rights will place Suriname in the category of countries
that deal with their troubled past. Executing the judgment

PARAMARIBO 00000450 002.4 OF 002


shows that Suriname respects human rights. It is of course
very sad that local human rights NGOs, assisted by
international NGOs, had to bring this case to an
international forum. They had to do this, as over the 18-20
years since the killings, local efforts to move the
Government to investigate the killings did not lead to
prosecution of the perpetrators and compensation of the
villagers for damages.

The human rights organizations also have to be complimented
for their effort and their drive. They brought forward this
case and were successful in the end. This case shows that
local groups can be successful in pressuring the Government
and it also shows that international treaties have to be
observed. If a country wants to be part of the
international community, it has to comply with
international standards. Treaties can't just be signed, but
the citizens should also be educated so they know the
obligations the state has as the result of the treaty. How
many Surinamese know the articles of the Inter-American
Convention on Human Rights?

The public ceremony on Saturday should be seen as a
cleansing ceremony for the Surinamese people and a warning
for people who violate human rights in the Republic
Suriname. The next step is that the State should bring
clarity in the December murders of 1982, because in that
case there are also families who suffered psychologically,
morally and materially.

END TEXT OF EDITORIAL


3. (U) In the event, Venetiaan went, and offered the
apology required by the court ruling, while stressing his
current government was unimplicated. Desi and Ronnie did
not attend, although Brunswijk was present at the second
ceremony at the actual massacre site. This thoughtful
piece captures both the importance and the difficulty of
resolving the echoes of a difficult period in Suriname's
history.

BARNES