• Military Menu                       

• Introduction
• Systems
• Facilities
• Agencies
• Industry
• Operations
• Countries
• Hot Documents
• News
• Reports
• Policy
• Budget
• Congress
• Links

• WMD
• Intelligence
• Homeland Security
• Space

Suriname - Politics

Suriname is a constitutional democracy with a president elected by the unicameral National Assembly. An autonomous part of the Netherlands from 1954, Suriname became fully independent in 1975. Suriname was a working parliamentary democracy in the years immediately following independence. Henk Arron became the first Prime Minister and was re-elected in 1977.

The diversity of its population — mainly East Indian, West Indian, Javanese, Bush Negro and Amerindian (Arawak Indian) - complicates both the economic and social picture. Although many of the factors that were present in British Guiana exist in Surinam, Communism had not gained a stronghold.

Suriname is ethnically one of the most diverse societies in the Americas and the Caribbean. The country consists of many ethnic groups and tribal people who to a large extent maintained their original linguistic and cultural heritage. It is important to note that the various ethnic and tribal groups are all minorities. The largest groups are East Indian (29%), Creole (19%), Maroon (16%), Javanese (15%), and the Amerindian (4%). There is also a large group of mixed origin (13%) and smaller groups such as the Chinese, Syrian, Lebanese and Whites. The diversity of Suriname becomes more complex if we add in religion. People of the three major world religions contribute with substantive percentages to the religious diversity: Christian (49%), Hindu (23%) and Islam (16%). Furthermore there are various tribal, Afro-American/ native religions (winti) and other religions such as Javanism. This is a quite different from the overall picture in the Americas and the Caribbean.

Compared with most countries in the Americas, ethnicity is in Suriname relatively more important than skin color. Ethnicity became important in official social constructions in the post-World War II decolonization process of this country, and replaced the concept of ‘race’ since the 1964 census. In political and social life a tradition evolved to negotiate differences between ethnic, religious and other (cultural) groups, while the related cross-boundary communication contributed to the relative peaceful inter-ethnic relations in Suriname.

Since Suriname was described as a ‘Plural Society’ in the late 1940s, it has evolved today into a society with a much greater complexity. In addition to ethnicity, religion and culture, other dimensions – such as class, gender, region, equity and immigration - are important factors that must be considered in order to understand the social, political and economic dynamics.

Inequality is a major issue in Suriname that is largely influenced by differences between urban, rural and interior regions, rather than gender and skin color as in other countries in the region. While in many countries of the Americas inequality improved, in Suriname it has become worse. A major predictor of inequality is the place of residence that strongly influences personal income and educational level. In perceived discrimination skin color to some extent does play a role and it has a negative impact on the educational level as well. Being older with a darker skin color has a negative impact on educational status in Suriname, while gender does not play a major role. Like in most countries of the Americas men in Suriname have a more favorable position than women. As the place of residence (urban-rural status) has an even stronger effect than skin color, affirmative action is considered appropriate in this country. Food insecurity is no major issue in Suriname. However, the public assistance received is among the highest in the Americas, which is primarily due to the paternalism in the Surinamese politics.

The support for democracy in Suriname is not only high, but at the same time there are also strong stable democratic attitudes and institutions in the country. As regards support for the political system, this country scores very high if compared with other countries in the Americas. The political tolerance scores for Suriname are slightly higher than the average for all countries in this region. Given the fact that the system support, the political tolerance and trust in institutions are high, Suriname can be considered a stable democracy.

For the past three decades governments in power have been confronted with increasingly vocal demands by the population of the interior to recognize their right to the land they live on and to guarantee access to and preservation of the resources they need to subsist. Moreover, both the indigenous and Maroon populations of the interior are also asking the government to recognize their right to maintain their way of life in the context of the nation state.

The uncontrolled extraction of resources in the interior is also having a devastating impact on the environment and in some cases on the health of the local population. Hydraulic mining operations are causing massive siltation and expulsion of mercury pollution in rivers throughout the interior, often upstream from villages. The unstructured communities of thousands of miners are plagued by many social and health problems, including high crime rates, prostitution, and an increase in diseases such a malaria.

Uncontrolled use of malaria drugs has bred resistance and the tailing ponds have provided a new breeding environment that has greatly increased the population of the carrier. The traditional authorities do not have the means to control the situation and several conflicts, some of them violent, have occurred in mining areas.

Human rights issues included corruption, trafficking in persons, violence and abuse against women and children, use of child labor, and criminal defamation laws, although there were no prosecutions during the year 2018. The government took steps to investigate, prosecute, and punish officials who committed human rights abuses, whether in the security forces or elsewhere in the government. Observers nonetheless expressed concern that high public officials and security officers had impunity from enforcement.

Independent media were active and expressed a wide variety of views without formal restriction. Multiple media outlets published materials critical of the government. Ownership affiliations, either pro- or antigovernment, influenced the overall tone of reporting. Agents of the government used state media, particularly the state-run radio station, as a tool to criticize and attack those with views opposing the government. In certain instances the attacks directly threatened democracy and rule of law. Violence and Harassment: Journalists reported intimidation by government and nongovernment actors. To protect the identity of journalists, two of four leading daily newspapers intermittently printed only the initials of writers instead of their full names. Another newspaper printed articles without an author’s name. The generally low wages for journalists made them vulnerable to bias and influence, which further jeopardized the credibility of reporting. Independent media faced competition for qualified journalists.

The average number of people represented in each electoral district varies significantly. A seat in one district can represent almost ten times more voters than in another. These distortions could be eventually revised in order to ensure a more balanced representation of inhabitants per district while ensuring that all regions in the country have access to parliament and political representation. Suriname could explore mechanisms to remedy these disparities to ensure a more balanced representation of inhabitants per district while at the same time securing representation for all regions.

In Suriname political parties do not receive any form of direct or indirect public funding and that much of their financing comes from voluntary contributions by party members. It is also important to notice that there are no regulations on private financing and anonymous contributions are permitted. In addition to this, it is not expressly forbidden in the law for governing parties to utilize public funds to promote their candidates.