Logging and Tribal Rights in Suriname
by Fergus MacKay
Coordinator, Legal and Human Rights Programme, 
Forest Peoples Programme

Chinese logging companies are relatively new arrivals in South America. In Suriname, at least two have been operating since in 1996; in neighbouring Guyana, the first arrivals surfaced in the year 2000. In both cases, the companies are operating on or near Indigenous and Tribal lands. Reports have also surfaced of Chinese companies operating in northern Brazil. The widely reported ban on domestic logging in China, in part prompted by devastating flooding related to forest loss, is one obvious reason for the internationalization of Chinese logging. According to Surinamese government statistics for the years 1999 and 2000, Chinese loggers were by far the largest producers of round wood and China was by far the largest export destination for Surinamese round wood, exceeding the next highest destination fourfold.

This short article looks at one area of Suriname where the Chinese have set up operations and the impact of those operations on the Saramaka people, one of the six Maroon tribes living within Suriname’s borders¹. Maroons are the descendants of escaped slaves who fought themselves free from slavery and established viable, autonomous communities along the major rivers of Suriname’s rainforest interior in the 17^th and 18^th centuries. Their freedom from slavery and rights to lands and territory and the autonomous administration thereof were recognized in treaties concluded with the Dutch colonial government in the 1760s and reaffirmed in further treaties in the 1830s. Maroons consider themselves and are perceived to be culturally distinct from other sectors of Surinamese society and regulate themselves according to their own laws and customs. As such, they qualify as Tribal peoples according to international definitional criteria and for the most part enjoy the same rights as Indigenous peoples under international law.

The Saramaka people are one of the largest Maroon tribes, amounting to around 20,000 persons living in over 70 villages located along the Suriname River, one of the main watercourses in the country. They have occupied their territory since at least the early 18^th century when their ancestors escaped coastal plantations and moved into the forest. Their freedom from slavery, to ownership of their territory and to political and cultural autonomy were recognized by treaty with the Dutch in 1762. This treaty was renewed in 1835 and, in the minds of the Saramaka, remains the basis of their autonomous existence, ownership of their territory and relationship with the Surinamese state. Ownership of Saramaka territory is divided among a number of matrilineal clans. Members of the clans have rights to hunt, fish, farm and gather forest produce in the area owned by their clan, but ownership remains vested collectively in the clan. Despite this, Suriname presently maintains that the Saramaka, and other Indigenous and Maroon peoples, have no rights to their lands and resources, all of which are owned by the state and can be exploited at any time.

The Saramaka people regard the forest as fundamental to their physical, cultural and spiritual existence and live in a delicate balance with their natural environment. They derive the majority of the subsistence resources from the forest and their religion is based upon a relationship with spirits that inhabit certain areas of the forest and with their ancestors. In short, Saramaka religious and cultural identity and their physical survival is inextricably linked to their forest and its productive capacity. Threats to the forest and its environmental quality are threats to the Saramaka as a whole.

For over 200 years the Saramaka were essentially left to their own devices by the Dutch and after that by Suriname. This changed in the early 1960s when a hydroelectric dam was constructed on the Suriname River to power a bauxite refinery operated by US company, Alcoa. This dam flooded a large area of Saramaka territory forcing 6,000 Saramaka to relocate. This took place without any prior consultation, without adequate compensation and in violation of Saramaka treaty and other rights.

Some 30 years later, the government began issuing logging and mining concessions in Saramaka territory, the former incorporating all of the Saramaka villages of the Upper Suriname River (south of the dam), the latter some of the relocated Saramaka living to the north of the dam. After intense international pressure, the logging concessions were withdrawn and the government promised to observe the 150,000 hectare limit prescribed by the 1992 Forestry Act.

In the following years, Suriname invested in developing an image as a country that respected the environment, culminating in 1998 with the establishment of the Central Suriname Nature Reserve, the largest area of protected tropical forest in the world. This reserve was jointly developed with US-based environmental organization, Conservation International, which ensured that the reserve was given substantial press coverage.

Although the Kwinti Maroons lost at least a third of their ancestral land without any meaningful prior consultation or compensation when the reserve was created, Suriname was hailed as a world leader in environmental protection and a model for others to follow.

What was not said, however, was that the government had at the same time granted vast areas of Suriname’s rainforests to multinational logging and mining companies and had licensed anywhere between 15-40,000 Brazilian small-scale miners to operate without regulation in the country. The government also circumvented its promise not issue logging concessions in excess of the Forestry Act’s limits by granting multiple 150,000 hectare concessions to the same companies. One company, NV MUSA, an Indonesian company, for example, was granted between 800,000 and 1 million hectares under the names of a variety of front companies. The majority of the Indigenous and Maroon villages in Suriname were included in these concessions. They were not even informed that these concessions had been granted, let alone consulted or asked if they agreed.

The Saramaka, for instance, only became aware of a concession in their territory when the employees of a Chinese logging company calling itself NV Tacoba or NV Tacoba Forestry Consultants arrived in the area and began operations. When challenged by the communities, they were told that the company had permission from the government and any attempt to interfere with or challenge its operations would be punished by imprisonment. Other concessions, particularly gold and stone concessions, were subsequently discovered when the Saramaka obtained a map of concessions via an NGO. These concessions included a large logging concession issued to NV Botopasi, which is suspected to be a front company for MUSA². This concession encompasses most of the 58 Saramaka communities of the Upper Suriname River. Another Chinese company, calling itself Jin Lin Wood Industries surfaced in the area in 2000.

According to the Saramaka, Tacoba’s and Jin Lin’s operations have included damage to the forest and water quality, construction of a substantial network of feeder roads contributing to water pollution and further destruction of the forest, a reduction in game animals, destruction of subsistence farms, restrictions on community access to hunting, fishing and farming areas and intimidation from company employees. Tacoba’s operations are not subject to any form of oversight or monitoring by state authorities. In addition to inadequate monitoring, Suriname lacks any environmental laws or regulations that can be used to control the impact of resource exploitation.

In one case, Jin Lin built a road over a Saramaka woman’s farm. 15,000 Surinamese guilders (US$7.50) was offered as compensation for the loss of her farm. It cost her 80,000 Suriname guilders to pay someone to clear the forest plot prior to planting and all told she lost enough produce to feed her family for almost year as well as cash crops that provide much needed income. She now must rely on relatives to feed herself and her family. In the course of constructing the road that destroyed the woman’s and others’ agricultural plots, the same company also blocked the creek running through the area. This creek was the primary source of water for drinking, bathing and domestic use available to a nearby Saramaka community. It is now without a readily accessible water supply and is forced to travel large distances to obtain fresh water. The creek is also an important source of fish, a primary source of protein in the Saramaka diet.

On 20 May 2001, the Philadelphia Inquirer, a US newspaper, published an article on the activities of logging companies in Suriname with reference to the Saramaka situation. This report states in pertinent part that:

This was all too clear [environmental degradation] walking through the Jin Lin concession. The company had plowed large, muddy roads about 45 feet wide into the forest, churned up huge piles of earth, and created fetid pools of green and brown water. Upended and broken trees were everywhere and what were once plots of sweet potatoes, peanuts, ginger, cassava, palm and banana crops - planted in the forest by Maroon villagers - were muddy pits.

After discovering that there territory had again be given to logging and mining companies, the Saramaka began organizing and held a series of meetings among themselves to discuss how to deal with Tacoba and the other concessions. They agreed to file formal complaints with the Suriname government asking that the concessions be revoked and that their rights to their territory be legally recognized. Three complaints were submitted between October 1999 and October 2000, none of which received any response. They also evaluated their legal options to determine if they could challenge the concessions in court. They concluded that Surinamese law was so stacked against them that resort to the courts would be futile, offering them no possibility of success. As mentioned above, Surinamese law vests ownership of all unencumbered land and resources in the state, there are no environmental laws and Indigenous and Maroon rights are not in any way legally guaranteed.

After reaching this conclusion, the Saramaka decided to seek the protection of the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights and filed a petition there in October 2000. Filed by the Association of Saramaka Authorities, an organization composed of the leaders of the Upper Suriname River Saramaka communities, and twelve village leaders representing each of the Saramaka matrilineal clans, the petition cited Suriname’s failure to recognize Saramaka rights to land and resources as defined by the American Convention on Human Rights and active violation of those rights due to the logging and mining concessions granted in Saramaka territory.

This is the first time that either Indigenous peoples or Maroons from Suriname have challenged Suriname’s failure to recognize and respect their land rights in an international human rights body and, if successful, may represent a precedent that all other Indigenous peoples and Maroons can benefit from. The case is presently pending before the Commission. The Saramaka have requested that the Commission make itself available to mediate a friendly settlement to the case that will hopefully result in a negotiated settlement withdrawing the logging concessions and recognizing Saramaka territorial rights. Failing that they ask that the case be submitted to the Inter-American Court on Human Rights for a binding decision. To-date, Suriname has failed to respond in any way to the allegations made in the petition despite repeated requests from the Commission to provide information on the case.

The Saramaka case may well draw support from the Mayagna (Sumo) Awas Tingni Community v. Nicaragua Case recently decided by the Inter-American Court on Human Rights. This case was first addressed by the Commission, which found that Nicaragua had violated the right to property, judicial protection and due process of law by granting logging concessions on Indigenous lands without taking steps to title and demarcate those lands and without first obtaining Indigenous peoples’ consent³. Due to Nicaragua’s failure to comply with the Commission’s decision, the Awas Tingni Case was transmitted to the Inter-American Court on Human Rights for a binding decision. In its judgment, issued in August 2001, the Court observed that

Given the characteristics of the instant case, it is necessary to understand the concept of property in indigenous communities. Among indigenous communities, there is a communal tradition as demonstrated by their communal form of collective ownership of their lands, in the sense that ownership is not centered in the individual but rather in the group and in the community. By virtue of the fact of their very existence, indigenous communities have the right to live freely on their own territories; the close relationship that the communities have with the land must be recognized and understood as a foundation for their cultures, spiritual life, cultural integrity and economic survival. For indigenous communities, the relationship with the land is not merely one of possession and production, but also a material and spiritual element that they should fully enjoy, as well as a means through which to preserve their cultural heritage and pass it on to future generations⁴.

Finding that "The customary law of indigenous peoples should especially be taken into account because of the effects that flow from it. As a product of custom, possession of land should suffice to entitle indigenous communities without title to their land to obtain official recognition and registration of their rights of ownership;" the Court held, among others, that "the State must adopt measures of a legislative, administrative, and whatever other character necessary to create an effective mechanism for official delimitation, demarcation, and titling of the indigenous communities' properties, in accordance with the customary law, values, usage, and customs of these communities."

Whether the Saramaka will succeed in their case before the Commission remains to be seen and a decision may not be forthcoming for a number of years to come. While they wait for a decision from the Commission, the logging companies continue to push further into the forest leaving a trail of destruction behind them. Attempts to resolve the situation with the government locally continue to be fruitless and harassment and intimidation of the Saramaka as they go hunting, fishing and farming is also continuing. Most recently, the Saramaka allege that Jin Lin and Tacoba are being guarded by armed Surinamese army troops, although it is unclear if these troops are acting pursuant to orders or on a freelance basis. The Saramaka are presently mapping their occupation and use of their territory and resources in order to define their boundaries.

Finally, the Saramaka are not alone in experiencing substantial threats to their forests, well being and cultural survival in Suriname. Alcoa and the government are close to commencing bauxite mining in western Suriname, that will involve construction of another hydroelectric dam and the forced relocation of at least two Indigenous villages. The Maroon village of Nieuw Koffiekamp is facing forced relocation for the second time in 40 years to make way for a gold mine to be operated by the same companies responsible for the OMAI mine disaster in neighbouring Guyana. Many communities are experiencing severe problems caused by small-scale mining. Matawai Maroons, for instance, report that they cannot use rivers and creeks in their territory due to pollution caused by gold miners. In some cases, they have had to import water from the coast. They also report catching fish with tumors and soapy white eyes that are unfit for human consumption. It is estimated that 20 metric tons of mercury were released into Suriname’s waterways in 1999 alone by small-scale miners posing a substantial public health threat. The government’s only response has been to issue an advisory warning pregnant women and children not to eat fish due to mercury contamination.

1 The six Maroon peoples are: the Saramaka, the N’djuka, the Kwinti, the Matawai, the Aluku and the Paramaka,

2 The nature of MUSA’s activities in Suriname, where it has been working since 1993, have led to it being called "the flying bulldozer brigade." Substantial allegations have been made concerning destruction of forests, blatant violations of forest laws and exploitation of local communities. See, for example, Sizer and Rice, Backs to the Wall in Suriname: Forest Policy in a Country in Crisis. World Resources Institute, Washington DC, 1995; and, Colchester, Forest Politics in Suriname. International Books, Utrecht, 1995.

3 Inter-American Commission of Human Rights, Report No. 27/98 (Nicaragua), at para. 142, cited in, The Mayagna (Sumo) Awas Tingni Community Case, Judgment on the Preliminary Objections of February 1, 2000, Inter-Am. Ct. H.R. (Ser. C) No. 66 (2000).

4 Judgment of the Inter-American Court of Human Rights in the case of The Mayagna (Sumo) Indigenous Community of Awas Tingni v. the Republic of Nicaragua Issued 31 August 2001 (footnotes omitted), Unofficial translation by Indian Law Resource Center, at para. 149