On Friday the design for the proposed bridge over the Corentyne River was unveiled in the presence of Public Works Minister Juan Edghill and his Suriname counterpart, Dr Riad Nurmohamed. It will link Guyana and Suriname between points close to existing ferry stations at South Drain on the one side and Moleson Creek on the other. Designed in two sections it is connected by the islet, Lange Island. Ships of between 40 to 45,000 lbs deadweight tonnage will be able to pass underneath its highest portion, which runs between the island and the Suriname mainland, while the segment connected to the Berbice shore will be much lower.
It is the Trinidad-based consultants, WSP Caribbean, which have designed the proposed bridge, although its cost along with reports on the traffic projections, financial and economic evaluation, environmental assessment, legal framework and the design of the roads, among other things, are yet to be finalised. It is too early to say exactly who will build it, although there are several pre-qualified contractors/joint ventures on the list, all of whom are Chinese save one, namely Ballast Nedam Infra Suriname BV.
It would seem that the two governments are in no mood to procrastinate, Mr Edghill saying that both sides were hoping to have a contract in place by October of this year, and that the bids were scheduled to be opened by August 1. The procedure which will then follow will allow for both sides to independently evaluate the bids and then hold discussions prior to choosing the most competitive. As if to emphasise the sense of urgency, the Minister said, “[W]e need to be moving it [the project] along.” He was echoed by Dr Nurmohamed who declared that “Building the bridge is very high on the agenda for both countries.”
According to a release the Corentyne bridge will be built according to a Public Private Partnership arrangement, which means that the successful contractor for the joint venture will be responsible for its final design, construction, financing, operation and maintenance. Minister Edghill waxed lyrical on all the advantages to be derived from the bridge describing it as not just a “physical connection between two landmasses” but also a “social connection between two peoples.” He looked forward to stronger cultural bonds and more knowledge-sharing activities across the common border, in addition to transforming travel between Georgetown and Paramaribo and opening both countries to greater possibilities for tourism. Significantly he called attention to “untouched Lange Island” which, he said, had “enormous potential for commercialization and development of a free trade zone with hotels, resorts and all forms of entertainment that will attract tourists to Guyana and Suriname.”
It was during a three-day visit by President Irfaan Ali to Suriname in November 2020 that a Memorandum of Understanding in relation to bridging the Corentyne River was signed. Whether the bridge is part of the larger hemispheric project to which President Ali is apparently committed was not altogether clear, although the Minister did make reference to Guyana and Suriname being players in both the offshore and onshore oil and gas sector. The Corentyne bridge, therefore, he said, would give access to deep-water facilities in both countries.
Whatever the case, the matter of the Corentyne bridge on its own would be welcomed by most people in principle. The issues which would arise in practice would depend on the nature of the contract and the degree to which environmental considerations, to give one example, have been catered for. But before we get that far there is a niggling question which neither side has alluded to, and one wonders whether Minister Edghill has devoted any thought to it at all.
Anyone who has been around for long enough knows that agreements with Suriname are rarely implemented by our neighbour. In more recent times the so-called fishing agreements are a case in point. As is well known the matter of the Corentyne ferry was held up for years by Paramaribo simply because they wanted to establish jurisdiction, and it only got underway when Guyana made concessions which were not in the original treaty at all. Most of the decisions that Suriname takes in relation to this country have misapprehensions in relation to the boundary lurking in the background.
Before Guyana plunges into any accord on the matter of this bridge, therefore, it had better be clear about the sovereignty of the river, and, for that matter, the sovereignty of the island which Mr Edghill so blithely assumes can be a free-trade zone with resorts. Surinamers were told following the UN Convention on the Law of the Sea decision in 2007, that the Arbitral Tribunal had confirmed Suriname’s sovereignty over the entire Corentyne River. It didn’t. That is not part of the award. Somewhat unfortunately, however, it does express an opinion outside that context that the river belonged to Suriname, and our neighbours have clung onto this as though it were part of the legal decision.
Since with a bridge connecting two sovereign states the question of jurisdiction on one or another part of the bridge or the whole of it, will arise, Guyana has to be clear before it signs anything about what its stance is and what it is prepared to commit to. As far as this country is concerned, up to now the matter of the sovereignty of the Corentyne has never been settled by an international court or by bilateral negotiation or in any other way, and certainly if the New River Triangle were ever to come up for arbitration, then the river should do so along with it. In the meantime matters of jurisdiction in the context of the bridge will count as evidence should there ever be a case about it.
Minister Edghill and the President should understand that in order to accomplish matters in relation to the bridge with any expedition Guyana will be required to effectively concede sovereignty over the river to Suriname. If they are so casual and irresponsible as not to spell out jurisdictional details in any agreement, then Paramaribo will hold them to ransom on the matter as they did in the case of the ferry. Before the government proceeds any further it needs to look at our legislation in relation to boundaries, especially the Constitution, ask the Ministry of Foreign Affairs to undertake some research on negotiations with Suriname in past decades, and seek the assistance of lawyers specialising in frontier matters.
The ultimate solution to our difficulties with our neighbour would be to try and take the case of the New River Triangle and the Corentyne River to the ICJ, perhaps. Minister Edghill was reported as saying that the inking of the agreement marked a major milestone in the goal of constructing the Corentyne River Bridge, and that it expressed the commitment of both governments to improving the lives of their citizens. All that can be remarked is that it may turn out not to be that easy. In the meantime perhaps he would like to indicate what position the administration is taking on the matter of the river.
