In 2021 after meeting with President Chandrikapersad Santokhi of Suriname, President Irfaan Ali announced “We have come to a solution.” He was premature. We haven’t. He was referring to an agreement the two heads of state had signed for 150 licences to be issued by the neighbouring authorities to Guyanese fishermen enabling them to fish in Suriname waters. Prior to this announcement there had been myriad complaints from our fishermen about harassment of one form of another, including from the Suriname Coast Guard which would seize their boats and require them to pay a fine before they could get them returned.
At the bottom of the problem had been the fact that Guyanese had been buying licences from Surinamers, who were not fishing themselves but had secured them with a view to renting them to our fishermen for profit. The Guyana government had requested that the licences be issued directly to Guyanese, and this was the understanding coming out of the agreement. A year later nothing had happened. Suriname’s Minister of Agriculture had said that a company would be established for the purpose of issuing the licences, although why that should have been necessary is not at all obvious. In any case, no such company ever materialised, and in 2022 Guyanese complained that whereas a licence used to cost around US$3000 per boat per annum, it had now gone up to US$4500.
In addition to that, harassment continued, with fishermen telling the government that they were still being stopped and searched, and that sometimes their vessels were seized for some minor infringement and sold. In addition, they had to leave their boats in Suriname, and when they wanted to return here they had to “catch a small boat.”
That was in September last year, and now we come to March 2023. In a situation of cost-of-living pressure, the Guyanese fishermen are still being asked to pay rents of US$4500 and now in many cases US$5000 for a licence. The licence holders in Nickerie buy the licence from the authorities for less than US$50, and Corentyne fishermen told this newspaper earlier this month that they did not know how they could make a decent living this year since the licence rent would consume six months’ worth of their annual profit. In addition, they are still being told to leave their boats in Suriname, and worse still, they have to sell their catches there too for less than would be the case in this country.
Furthermore, their vessels now have to be equipped with trackers if they want to rent a licence, so the location of the boats can be monitored and it can be ensured that the fishermen cannot come to Guyana to sell their catches here. They said that even if they noticed small leaks in their vessels, they were not allowed to bring them to Guyana for repairs, and they were always afraid that if the leak got larger at sea, their lives could be at risk. And if an engine repair was involved, they would have to hire a speedboat to take it home to be fixed, and then charter another one to bring it back again. There were a few boats which did manage to evade the restrictions and sell their catches in Guyana, but they had to obscure the names of their boats when they did so.
The fishermen who spoke to our reporter would not reveal their names because the Surinamese monitor our newspapers and they would be labelled ‘troublemakers’ for speaking out. In some instances licence holders were told not to rent to people who were interviewed about the matter in the press: “They are very powerful persons ’cos they make a lot of money…” we were told. So much for Suriname democracy.
Last year in his customary unvarnished style Vice President Bharrat Jagdeo said there was “massive” corruption in the allocation of licences, “and a huge attempt to profiteer on the backs of Guyanese fishermen by many in authority in Suriname.” He did not stop there, alleging that a certain minister was linked to many of those controlling the licences, and that when Guyana provided information on who was profiteering to the Paramaribo authorities they were upset, because the issue was now in the public domain. In addition, he went on to say that the neighbouring authorities were even denying the existence of a fishing agreement, something which will not surprise those familiar with Suriname tactics.
Last month Guyanese fishermen lobbied the government again on the matter, stressing the importance of the industry and their contributions over the years. They were visiting State House in New Amsterdam at the time where President Irfaan Ali was holding a two-day outreach. It was not reported exactly what he responded, although presumably he told them the government was working on the matter. If he was going to be frank he should not have given them too much hope.
In the first place, if it is indeed the case that corruption is involved, as Mr Jagdeo has alleged, then President Santokhi would have to be in a stronger political position than he is at the moment to tackle it. The fact that he wants to pursue a certain policy does not mean that all the members of his coalition government see the issue in the same light. It was our Vice President who suggested, perhaps with tongue in cheek, that the Suriname Minister of Agriculture appeared to have more power than President Santokhi, since on the fishing matter it was the former’s rules which applied.
Secondly, with so many individuals profiting from the licensing of Guyanese vessels, it would be difficult in these hard economic times when there is a threat of social unrest for the head of state to suddenly cut off a source of income for so many. It was only in the middle of last month that the government faced a violent protest against the removal of fuel subsidies, during which Parliament was stormed, shops were looted and citizens were attacked. The government in Paramaribo would certainly not be seeking to add to its difficulties at this point.
Then in the third place there is something else too, and that is the border dispute which lurks in the background of any issue involving Suriname, however removed from frontier questions it might appear to be. And that can flare up without warning at any time. Most recently this occurred last month after the Joint Services destroyed a Brazilian mining site in the New River Triangle and seized a helicopter which was delivering food. The opposition in the Suriname Assembly was incensed because they erroneously consider the area which they call ‘Tigri’ as being part of their nation’s land space. “How can there be collaborations with our neighbour while they occupy our territory?” one member of Parliament was quoted as saying.
An opinion piece in the Suriname media outlet dwtonline observed that although former President Bouterse had said the ‘Tigri’ issue had his government’s attention, he wanted to focus more on what could be done in conjunction with Guyana to stimulate the economic development of both countries; solving ‘Tigri’ was not a problem. President Santokhi, the piece said further, had adopted a similar approach.
It might be noted that Bouterse’s party has now joined the chorus of voices condemning the GDF action in the New River Triangle, which Takuba Lodge has yet again had to insist is Guyanese terrain. What it means is that no matter what the stance taken by a government in Paramaribo on the boundary, when it is relegated to the opposition seats it will perform a volte face.
As has been noted before on several occasions Suriname has a bad record in terms of adhering to pacts, and while one of the few which held up, ie the ferry, did go into operation eventually, it was after a delay of years because our neighbour wanted to include provisions which in effect would acknowledge its jurisdiction over the Corentyne river. Messrs Ali and Santokhi now want a bridge. We will have to wait and see how long that will take.
In the meantime there is a lesson to be learned by President Ali, whose PPP/C government does not like to listen to those who served before and have experience of dealing with Paramaribo. He has to be very careful about trumpeting successful agreements with our neighbour until they have been actually implemented. He no doubt will try and speak to President Santokhi again on the fishing matter, but what he has to realise is that the latter may not have it in his power to deliver, for various reasons some of which are cited above, however willing he may be. Dwtonline in the opinion piece mentioned above was of the view that before there could be progress in relations, the border had to be settled first. Arbitration, among other things was suggested, and for the very first time in a Surinamese publication, mention was made of recourse to the ICJ.
As for the Corentyne fishermen, the government will have to come up with a really innovative proposal before there will be any hope of solving their problem in the short term.
