VZCZCXRO2502
RR RUEHGR
DE RUEHPO #0450/01 1991951
ZNR UUUUU ZZH
R 181951Z JUL 06 ZDS
FM AMEMBASSY PARAMARIBO
TO RUEHC/SECSTATE WASHDC 8536
INFO RUCNCOM/EC CARICOM COLLECTIVE
RUEHAO/AMCONSUL CURACAO 1067
RUEHTC/AMEMBASSY THE HAGUE 1565
RUEAHQA/OSAF WASHINGTON DC

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