-captain tells SN
The MV Lady Chandra I was virtually at the Skeldon wharf on Tuesday when it was intercepted by a Surinamese gunboat with eight soldiers which then called for back-up boats and forced the sugar transport vessel to Nickerie.
Captain of the MV Lady Chandra 1, Arnold Garraway made this disclosure in a telephone interview with Stabroek News while he and his crew were returning to Guyana from Nickerie mid-afternoon yesterday.
Garraway also disclosed that when he was in the Suriname lock-ups on Tuesday, a captain of a Guyanese fishing vessel shared the cell with him. The captain and the crew of another vessel which had been seized a week earlier was also released and his vessel returned to Guyana without their catch, shortly after the MV Lady Chandra 1 was escorted by a pilot vessel from Port Nickerie yesterday.
He added that shortly before they left Nickerie yesterday a third Guyanese captain and crew were also given the go ahead to return to Guyana. The captain of that crew, he said, was from Number 65 Village on the Corentyne and they had been held for almost a week. In their case, he said the captain had to face the court in Paramaribo where he was made to pay a fine before he was released.
Relating his experience, Garraway, who said that he had been plying the route regularly over the past thirteen years transporting bulk sugar from the Skeldon terminal for export, said it was the first time that he was pulled in by the Surinamese authorities.
He and his crew had left Port Georgetown shortly before midnight on Monday, October 13. It was about 12:35 pm on Tuesday that they were stopped by the Surinamese gunboat.
He said MV Lady Chandra I was “right up near to the wharf” at Skeldon when a Surinamese gunboat with about eight soldiers accosted the vessel. The Surinamese coastguards, about eight, boarded the vessel and told them they were in Suriname waters and that they have to go to Nickerie.
“We say we are not going to Nickerie,” he said and explained the journey they were on. They told him that the MV Lady Chandra I could not go to Skeldon because they were in Surinamese territory. He told them that he and his crew had been travelling on the river carrying out the same tasks for the past 13 to 14 years and they were never harassed. They told him that Guyanese would have to stop using the river. Feeling indignant, he said he asked them if “we have to dig another channel to go about our business.”
He said he never stopped the vessel. Because of the resistance, he said they called for backup and two other gunboats arrived with more soldiers and policemen. “They surrounded the boat,” he said. Those who boarded his vessel asked for his documents and that of the vessel and they confiscated them. They were returned after he was released.
In the meantime, he said that he called the Guyana National Shipping Corporation (GNSC), which had contracted the vessel to transport the sugar on behalf of the Guyana Sugar Corporation, and the owner of the vessel Kampta Persaud to inform them about their whereabouts. He said he had received a telephone call from the Guyana coastguard, which promised to call back but they never did.
When they got to Nickerie, he said that as captain, he was the only one held in the lock-up. The others had to remain on the boat. “They (the Surinamese authorities) never allowed them to go ashore,” he said.
He spent from Tuesday evening to Wednesday evening in the lock-up sharing the space with the captain of the Guyanese fishing boat, who was released on Thursday. He had been held even before Garraway in the concrete cell which had no bed and no roof. “If the rain had fallen, I don’t know what would have happened to us,” he said. They gave them food but he said that he could not eat and only drank the liquid.
When they were leaving yesterday, he said that the captain for the fishing boat who had been taken to Paramaribo had been released and he too was preparing to return to Guyana. The catches of both vessels had been confiscated.
“Somebody has to do
something”
Based on discussions with the captain who was incarcerated with him, he said it would appear as though a number of vessels have been seized in recent weeks and nobody in government seems to know “what is going on. Nobody can’t go about their regular business, or, even go home in peace? They harassing everybody. Somebody has to do something,” he said adding, “I don’t know what the government is doing but we have to get some assurances.”
Guyana has deemed the seizure of the vessel as another act of aggression and has registered its protest in a note verbale but it has had no response from the Suriname government.
Suriname is contending that the MV Lady Chandra I sailed the Corentyne River without a Surinamese pilot on board as requested by the Maritime Authority of Suriname (MAS), which in May 2006 restarted the piloting of (international) ships on the Corentyne River.
However, President Bharrat Jagdeo has said that Guyana does not recognize Suriname’s administrating the waterway. He said that the Corentyne River was a border river on which both countries should have user rights. In the case of Suriname, he said that the neighbouring country was trying to impose sovereignty unilaterally over the river even though Guyana has indicated a willingness to discuss the issue.
Garraway and his crew were scheduled to pick up a cargo of sugar from the Skeldon terminal last evening and leave there this morning for Port Georgetown.
Jagdeo may have the qualifications to be a minister,but not a president,he’s too soft allways trying to seek a diplomatic solutions.
i guess he isn’t going to react on surimane
I think that with Guyana winning that maritime (oil rig) dispute with Surinam, it disturbed the marabunta-nest for Surinam but President Jagdeo has proved he did what was necessary in that instance.
Diplomacy first
International Court second
and at the very last resort…
Let us see how this works out…
We need to blame this one on FINEMAN — Once again.
As was said a couple times here already: the Corentyne belongs to Suriname, according to International law.
Until Guyana officially gets its way (half of, or maybe the whole river), it will have to accept Suriname’s authority over the river, and be happy to be allowed to use it under certain conditions. I now start to understand why Jagdeo hasn’t retaliated yet: HE IS BOUND BY INTERNATIONAL LAW! He first has to object to this law and get a beneficial judgment before he can do anything.
See, we are now starting to get more information: Why 3 gunboats? Because the captain NEVER STOPPED THE VESSEL!!! Even IF you think you are in your rights, when you are approached by authorities, such action will be deemed resistance! and it will call for counter actions!
Funny thing is that the Surinamese people probably thought the Surinamese government was weak for allowing the Guyanese to “whatever they want” in Surinamese territory. Think of what you would Jagdeo to do if the situation was reversed. You would probably applaud him for showing his authority, if it was him who did this.
Another strange thing: How come it seems to be virtually IMPOSSIBLE to get a comment from ANYONE FROM SURINAME? NO ONE??? Not even a member of the coast guard? Not even someone from the streets? Not the ambassador? ‘Cause all I read is what Guyanese said happened.
When I hear/read that the Jagdeo demanded for the Surinamese Ambassador to appear in his office to explain these action, when I hear/read that Jagdeo either invited Venetiaan to GT or asked to be received in Par’bo to discuss the situation, and all these were refused, that’s when I will believe that Suriname is being non-compliant/aggressive/provocative.
Stop this stupidness and start taking positive action. Be more pro-active! If your neighbor is unilaterally trying to claim part of your property as his own, you don’t just sit at home saying that you are willing to discuss this dispute. You first try to reason with him and if that fails, you drag him to court to settle the matter. It would be funny if my neighbor claims part of my land to be his own and expects me to just sit there and watch how he uses that land to plant his garden.
In other words: if you have shown willingness to discuss the matter, with no positive response from the other party GO TO COURT!!!
I’m starting to get the feeling that the top of both countries keep procrastinating this issue, so they can use it to create tensions when they want to divert attention from more pressing issues.
All in all, first ask yourself how YOU would react if the situation was reversed!
Ow, and about the eastern border of Suriname (@ michael tannassee): The same International law applies there… The Marowijne river belongs to Suriname. The French have accepted this agreement and respect it, so there has never been reason to take action on that side.
Let me quote Rehuel:
“Another strange thing: How come it seems to be virtually IMPOSSIBLE to get a comment from ANYONE FROM SURINAME? NO ONE??? Not even a member of the coast guard? Not even someone from the streets? Not the ambassador?”
The answer to these questions is because Surinamese are educated about their history as it’s relates to the Corentyne River. By-the-way, anyone know what history of Guyana is being studied apart from Cuffy’s 1763 in Berbice?
One more addition:
Please keep in mind that there were 3 disputed areas: the territorial seas, sovereignty over the Corentyne, and the New River triangle.
If you read this PDF ( http://www.law.fsu.edu/Journals/transnational/vol13_1/donovan.pdf ) on page 90 (the 50th page of the pdf) you will see that Guyana can’t make any successful claim for the sovereignty of the Corentyne.
The matter of the territorial seas was settled with the UNCLOS judgement, leaving the New River Triangle to be disputed.
Even though International law states that the “thalweg” should be used to define borders, it also states that this should be so, unless special agreements are in place. In a 1799 treaty the west bank of the Corentyne is stated to be the border. After that other treaties were made, in which this 1799 treaty was used, without contesting this boundary, which would weaken Guyana in its claim.
If Guyana wants to oppose this, let them do so, but until they get a favorable award, Suriname holds sovereignty over the Corentyne river and can do “whatever it wants” on the river. So if they decide to require Guyanese ships to be piloted by a Surinamese pilot (or, as the Surinamese press states, that ships with a load capacity greater than 50 ton should be guided by a pilot vessel), then so be it. Who are you then to say that you don’t “recognize their administrating the waterway”?
… Do you NOW understand why Jagdeo, ie the Guyanese government, will not (be able to) react with (demonstration of) force???
Thank you Rehuel.
This is a serious issue that requires our rational and nationalistic approach and support, (Please Mr XQB Hacket, stop the idiotic, egoistic cynicism) and can be resolved at the International Court just the same way the Maritime Boundary Dispute with Suriname was.
After all, it is an unrealistic situation if Suriname is claiming all the territory washed by the Corentyne. This absolutely denies any waterway rights by Guyanese. This is a ridiculously unheard of situation where two countries share a river as a common boundary, but one country has absolutely no right to use the river. It is possibly that the legitimacy of such claim (if any) can be challenged at the World Court.
This type of treatment to Guyanese is just another faze, for this has been going-on for years. I lived in Suriname for 13 years, and know and have experienced much harassment while traveling at their point of entry apart from while trying to do things right regarding work permit/documents. I am sure much of the bloggers may have experienced or know of the days during the time of depression in Guyana during the late 70s and 80s, when Guyanese many of whom left their comfortable homes and cross the border and had to literally live in sometimes a fowl pen for survival. I could go-on and write a book on this, for it is too much to write here. But those experiences told me much about Guyanese. We are people with skills and guts/endurance!
All I can say to this is that if we do not contest this strange border issue, and there is a flood off the Corentyne river, there goes Berbice, or a part of it at any rate. Thehistoric ruling on ownership of the river is stupid and ought to be contested in court and/or in any other way that is deemed legal.
Richard,
Remember that this was done between two Dutch countys.
Hi David:
If the agreement was between two Dutch counties as opposed to two countries, then that agreement cannot be binding between two nations. If this is the case then Guyana ,and by extension Surinam, should be agreeing on a new border.
My understanding is that the agreement was between Britain and the Netherlands, the two powers that owned Guyana and Surinam respectively. If this is in fact the case then that agreement would still be binding but if seen to be unfair, could be appealed to whatever world authority has jurisdiction over issues of this nature – CARICOM or the UN; I am not sure which.
TRONE YOU OPEN THE ACCOUNT AND AUTHORIZE ME ON IT