Months before the controversial seizure of a Guyanese vessel in the Corentyne River, Suriname’s Justice Minister Chandrikapersad Santokhi claimed that the river across its entire width to be completely Surinamese territory.
According to a report in the de Ware Tijd newspaper, Santokhi made the claim in April to Guyana’s President Bharrat Jagdeo, explaining that nationals of both countries engaged in economic activities on or through the river should abide by regulations in force. de Ware Tijd said Santokhi made the comment to President Jagdeo during a meeting of Caricom Ministers in charge of national security that was held in Guyana.
In mid-October Suriname’s maritime authority seized the MV Lady Chandra in what Guyana has labelled an act of aggression. The boat captain was placed in the lock-ups and the other six crew members were left on board the vessel. The vessel and crew were eventually released after the payment of a fine of US$400. Guyana has since lodged a complaint with the United Nations over the incident.
ankoko why dont you shut up why do we have to get agreement to use our own river are we going to give away whats rightfully ours damm it
Well said: Why didn’t Jagdeo do a thing when the minister told him that “months before the seizure”??
I know why: Jagdeo knows that the only action he can take, is to go to the courts! Right now history is on the side of Suriname, when it comes to the authority over the river. The only way to contest that is to have your lawyers dig up as much as possible to proof that the agreements made in the past, should be nulled and void, and new agreements should be made.
I myself (a Surinamese national living in Guyana) would like to see these border issues resolved yesterday rather than today. Then they can’t be used anymore to stir up the people in both countries. Suriname and Guyana should be living as neighbors, friends, welcoming eachother in their countries. But instead, stupid issues like these are used to create hostility towards the other.
Hell, split up the river, I don’t care. At least, when that’s done, maybe there will be more attention given to children dying due to hospital negligence, or drunks who attempt murder and getting released on a $10.000 bail, and thousands who are without adequate electricity and water for great parts of the day.
Think of it this way: what will be the benefit for your children, if this continues this way? And for their children. Do you expect your president to invest millions of US dollars in border patrol, while your children cannot get the adequate food, water, schooling etc, they need? Will you send your 18 year old boys to join the army when there will be a display of force and retaliation from the government?
Given the chronology of events, you should reason before you call for harsh action. The minister told the president he owns the river. President does nothing publicly. Months later, vessel is hailed by Suriname, but doesn’t stop, until they board the ship. President suddenly thinks this is the appropriate time to address the issue as an “act of aggression” (may it be that Suriname saw the ship without Surinamese pilot [vessel] as an act of provocation???) . Almost a month later we find out that he knew that Suriname claims the river.
Suriname claims the river, you don’t agree. The only thing you can do (in this modern day civilized society) is to bring this matter to court.
Remember that most of the time “acts of aggression” come after “acts of provocation”. If you hold in your hand an agreement that the border will be at the west bank of the river (see 1799 treaty) and you adapt your laws to include this river, wouldn’t you see it as an act of provocation if I just entered your river without respecting your laws? Would it be unfair to me if you showed an “act of aggression” to uphold the laws that you made?
REASON!!! What would be your reaction if the roles were reversed?
I don’t recall Suriname saying that Guyana is not allowed to use the river. They only expect Guyana to abide by the Surinamese laws, since it’s considered Surinamese territory.
Congratulations for identifying yourself as Surinamese in this debate.
SOME CLARIFICATIONS ON THE 1799 TREATY
>>>In the agreement the west bank and west coast of the Corentyne river were to belong to Berbice. The islands in the river were to go to Suriname. In addition, it was stipulated that Suriname inhabitants who had been given passes to trade with the Indians in the river, should not be prohibited from continuing their traffic.
The fact that the islands in the Corentyne went to Suriname, for instance, does not indicate that the whole river was intended to be under that territory’s jurisdiction. This clause lends itself to quite the opposite construction, since if the whole river was to be Surinamese, there would be no need to specify that the islands should go to Suriname. The same argument applies to the provision allowing traders who had been issued passes by the Governor of Suriname to continue trafficking with the Indians along that waterway. If the whole river was meant to be Surinamese, there would be no need for this clause at all.
In a general sense, before the 1930s the authorities on neither side behaved as if the Corentyne were a purely Dutch river; they operated as if the boundary was in midstream. It was under the draft treaty which was under discussion for much of the 1930s that the whole of the Corentyne up to the low water mark on the western bank was to go to Suriname. However, that treaty was never signed.<<<
http://www.guyanaca.com/suriname/guyana_suriname_colonial.html
Guyana’s/Guyanese passiveness and ignorance on this issue can be taken advantage of.
Tell me of another country, that owns the whole river. That hat divides two countries. I would like to know. One last question, how come in the days of L.F.S.B Suriname never mess with Guyana.
Look we are all wasting our time discussing this. From the time Suriname seized that boat ,the GDF should have been patrolling that river.Guyana is being punked by this little country.They have no respect for us ,they will only understand force, we have got to stop complaining to these little islands in caricom they cant help, we have got to get serious.
Another chapter in the bid to take over Guyana .. and all the government can do is complain .. when the great LFSB was in power the surinamese did not have the balls to think of such actions .. now that they know that they can do what they like and get no reaction from the group masquerading as the guyana government they will darn well like do as they please .. they might as well cross over the river and claim the entire Courentyne .. the ‘line’ in the river continues to be redrawn by the surinamese in their favor and the inept Jagdeo government can do nothing about it ..
To the best of my knowledge the suriname’s boundry ends at the low tide level of the edge of the river
Somebody say high tide, you say low tide. Khufu, wake up. We were made to believe all sorts of things because Guyana, until lately, has always felt that to take care of these things is not important. If the PPP could have awarded a contract to a friend to sort this issue out, it would have been taken care of since 1992. However, there has been no deal to be gained here. Now that the Skeldon Sugar Factory is ready to roll, they have started to think. It is another case of putting the cart in front of the horse.
Red Lion
This is also what I was taught in school.
Without this point, as someone else said earlier, great parts of Berbice would be Surinamese in case of a flood. But this is why it is not true. The river belongs to Suriname, in the sense that its borders extend to the low tide level mark of the western edge of the river.
Kufu,
I think you are attached to the Suriname Embassy in Georgetown.
RL
half de river belong to guyana and de other half belong to guyanese and none for the tiny mouse…..
They never try messing with the PNC and the great L.F.S Burnham,
in those days the country had a good GDF
Mr. Rehuel,
According to our understanding Suriname has no Agreement that gives them control over the Courantene River. Agreements were proposed but not entered into. This river has all the characteristics of a border river, and hence it should be treated as a border river with the boundary being mid-stream. Suriname is just trying to bully its way here again, and I am sure if this issue goes to court, they would not be comfortable with the result.
Red Lion
http://www.gtrl.tv
We would not be comfortable with it, but we would accept it, as we did with the ITCLOS ruling about the territorial seas.
But that’s actually what I suggest: stop the hair pulling! Your understanding says there’s no agreement, we believe that the 1799 treaty, which has been used for 200 years for other issues, is THE agreement on which we base our claim. Will we continue pulling and pushing? Or will we just go to court already.
As I said earlier, I don’t care if the river is split or not. I don’t care what a court would decide. There is too much wrong in both countries, that would affect my future and that of my children and their children, to worry myself over some political game. “Here, you half, I half… Can we now please focus on education, food, crime etc?”
Get it over with already!
Nice idea, by the way, your GTRL site. We may end up doing business in the future..
Please tell us what line and paragraph of the 1799 Treaty you are referring to. It is how you interpret it. I am sure that your interpretation, like most other Surinamer is fully in favor of Suriname.
Red Lion
Honestly, I haven’t looked at any of the Surinamese documents about this issue, so I’m not trying to bend stuff in our favor. I did look at documents of Guyanese authors, in which I find some contradictions.
One says that the treaty “specified that the west coast and west bank of the Corentyne River as far as the Devil’s Creek, which previously were part of the colony of Surinam, were now considered as belonging to the Government of Berbice.” Correct me if I’m wrong, but to me this reads that the west coast and bank of the Corentyne used to be part of Suriname (ie. fell under the authority of Suriname), but were given to Guyana. This means that the rest is still under Surinamese authority.
I also mentioned a pdf earlier, which was part of the Florida State University College of Law’s Transnational Journal of fall 2003. Not Surinamese, not my interpretation.
By the way, I only read interpretations of the treaty. If you could point me to the original treaty, I would be very thankful.
Col Mc Pherson,Brig Collins………………your country needs you sir!! Where are you its time you stand up and be counted,I almost lost my life in Eterinbang serving my dear land.Please where is the leadership we need and deserve at this time,Im sure its just as painful for you as it is for me to live through this generation of lost hope,prostitution of our children,abject poverty,untold suffering etc.Please Please let the revolution begin.A visa is not the answer to our problems the answers lay within.
David Colins you mean…..my personal friend?
Red Lion
After reading this, I went to look for the article in de Ware Tijd newspaper. STAFF (read: the author of the above article) missed a couple of important points in his report. Especially the part where the minister Persaud kinda blames the Guyanese media for the spreading of this news.
You be the judge, I translated the article and I post it here so you can have a complete understanding.
————————————————————
Santokhi points out Jagdeo to the regulations Corentyne river
by Ivan Cairo
13/11/2008
Paramaribo – The Corentyne river is in its full with Surinamese territory and Guyanese and Surinamese, doing economic activities on or through the river should abide by the regulations in force.
This was said by [security] minister Chandrikapersad Santokhi to Guyanas president Bharat Jagdeo last week, when the head of state made remarks, in a conversation, about the seizure of Guyanese vessels on the Corentyne river by Surinamese authorities. Santokhi was in Georgetown last week for a meeting of Caricom ministers in charge of national security.
In conversation with de Ware Tijd the minister said that the seizure of the Guyanese vessels was not formally addressed during the bilateral conversations that he had with his Guyanese college Clement Rohee. During a meeting with Santhoki, Jagdeo tried to address the issue in a playful manner, by asking the minister why he is seizing all his vessels. This happened in company of Guyana’s agri minister Robert Persaud. “He (Jagdeo) didn’t seriously discuss it with me. He said it jokingly, that he sees that I’m seizing all his vessels on the Corentyne river…” said the justice minister. The Guyanese head of state was then told that the Surinamese justice authorities are only doing operations for justice keeping on Surinamese territory, and that there are laws in place for the territory as a whole, including the Corentyne river. “If Guyanese vessels want to use the Corentyne river for production activities, there are regulations that they need to uphold, and those regulations don’t only apply to Guyanese vessels, they also apply to Surinamese vessels”, Jagdeo got as a response.
The president was also told that he, if he believes that certain issues are pressing, looking at his good contacts with President Venetiaan, just needed to pick up the telephone to discuss these issues with his college in Paramaribo. Minister Persaud was told that the information in the Guyanese media, making it appear as if Suriname tries to use aggression to force an outcome on certain issues, “is not good for the bilateral cooperation”. Persaud pointed the finger to the media, who, according to him, “selectively pick up information”.
Recently, a Guyanese sugar vessel was seized by Justice [authorities], because it wanted to pick a load of sugar illegally and without guidance of a Surinamese pilot vessel. After payment of a fine, the crew could return home after a few days, and the vessel was released. Georgetown quickly sent a diplomatic note to Paramaribo to protest, and as is understood, the UN and Caricom were informed about the incident.
—————————————————————
The security meeting was last week, not in April. This meeting was the perfect opportunity to officially address this issue, but it wasn’t. Instead Jagdeo “jokes” about it.
It kinda hurts me, after watching Jagdeo on TV address this issue here in Guyana, to now read that the blame is put on the media for exaggerating the issue and making a big fuss out of it. While the people is stirred to hatred and hostility towards the neighbor, the ones in charge don’t formally address the issue.
As I said a couple of time before: REASON and RESEARCH before you call for retaliation!
Look, I am not pro-Jagdeo, but the Surinamers seem to be playing an old trick here. They want to divide the Guyanese people, they want Guyanese to fight amongst themselves and start to blame various people for not handling this thing properly – creepy people.
What is meant when you people say that the President said jokingly? Did Jagdeo giggle when he asked the question? Did he smile? I just did not get it.
Red Lion
On the 1799 treaty…
It specified that the West Coast/Bank of the Corentyne belonged to Berbice, because in the interim (because of the war and because of no specific delineations), Suriname authorities were granting concessions on the West Coast Corentyne.
Secondly, it explicitly gave the islands in the River to Suriname. If the entire River belonged to Suriname, it would be understood that Islands in the river would be Suriname’s and there would be no need to state it. Nothing specifically says that Leguan is Guyanese territory cause it’s understood that all the islands in the Essequibo form part of Guyana.
Thirdly, the treaty allows people from Suriname to trade with Amerindians in the River…….that would also be a given if the river was entirely Suriname’s.
Bottom line both sides were treating it as though it had the common characteristics of an border river.
I have no reason to doubt the account of the de Ware Tijd article cause sadly that’s governments M.O.
I think that they are some really smart people in Suriname. I think if this goes to an international court, Suriname could be very happy, especially if Guyana keeps bubblin. An international river is usually divided down the middle, but at this point Suriname can prove that its not an international river by just building up proof that they are solely exercising jurisdiction over the river. ENACTING AND ENFORCING LAWS, issuing fishing and transport license and showing that their military is the only legitimate force in the river.
My concern is for Guyanese industries that depend on using the river, and the bureaucracy of having it have a Surinamese directly involved on every craft. Also the fact that Surinamese military are very disrespectful to Guyanese (LoveGT 4 Real’s Orealla example).
For the years since Guysuco started to operate out of Skeldon, how many times have their ships been forced to have a Surinamese pilot?
Int’l law is fair. The common trend in int’l border rivers is using a mid point. If Guyana was only to show an interest in such an arrangement, in the light of a seemingly inconclusive treaty, an international arbitration should go in that direction.
but the Guyana govt. is dropping the ball by just allowing Suriname to enforce jurisdiction at will. The only reason I can see them doing this, is if they don’t want the responsibility of law enforcement in the river, but again, that makes no business sense.
By the way, Suriname has proven itself a relatively provocative and aggressive neighbour. The last thing that we want is for Surinamese soldiers to have full legal grounds for ego driven excesses, examples to numerous to mention.
Have i read correctly?Under no circumstances should GUYANA ’sPRESIDENTJajdeo had discusion with the the suriname Justice minister they are not EQUALS.I hope he now meet with his counterpart to discuss this very important matter this might be the downfall of the ppp.