October
12, 2007
Suriname
parliament rejects motion to challenge maritime boundary award
Caribbean
Net News
PARAMARIBO,
SURINAME - The Venetiaan administration in Suriname will not challenge
the maritime boundary award of a United Nations Arbitration Tribunal,
which on September 17, 2007 settled a long-standing dispute with
neighboring Guyana.
The
National Assembly, Suriname's parliament, in an emergency session
on Thursday voted against a motion from the opposition in which
it urged the government to establish a national reviewing commission
to scrutinise the award in order to challenge the decision. Twenty-four
out of thirty-seven members of parliament who were present voted
against the motion.
A
panel of experts here said they had discovered irregularities in
the calculations of the equidistance line by the UN Arbitration
Tribunal. The ad hoc and independent 'Platform to study the ITLOS
award' presented its findings on Monday to President Ronald Venetiaan,
offering the Suriname government tools to officially query the decision
before the term of 30 days to do so expired.
According
to the platform the award is not fair and equitable, since Guyana
has been awarded 65 percent of the 31,600 square kilometers-wide
former area of dispute, while Suriname received the remaining 35
percent.
Amongst
other things, the panel also argued that, since the UN Tribunal
has applied equidistance as the only principle to determine the
maritime boundary, a greater accuracy was very essential. The Tribunal
allegedly used only 17 equidistance points to determine the new
maritime boundary, far too few, the experts claimed.
Well-prepared
and well-documented, President Venetiaan on Thursday dismissed all
the arguments of the panel of experts, who claimed that there were
computation errors in the establishment of the equidistance line
determined by the Tribunal as the definite maritime boundary between
Suriname and Guyana.
After
receiving the panel's report on Monday, the government consulted
several other local and international experts and universities in
the Netherlands and the United Kingdom to comment on the arguments
of the platform. The government has been advised not to challenge
the award on the basis of the findings of the platform.
The
Netherlands Institute for the Law of the Sea (NILOS) at the University
of Utrecht concluded that the platform did not suggest corrections
pursuant to the article 17 of the procedural rules of the Tribunal.
According to the NILOS the platform has suggested a complete different
calculation method to establish the equidistance line. The Dutch
institute said that, after analysing the platform's report, it didn't
find any credible or substantial claims that, if put forward to
the Tribunal, Suriname would be successful in its challenge.
The
government also sought comment from Judge Stephen M. Schwebel, former
president of the International Court of Justice on the technical
report included in the Tribunal's award.
In
his comment, Judge Schwebel noted that, in his view, "the Arbitral
Tribunal and its hydrographer in the Guyana v. Suriname case correctly
implemented the applicable legal principles and methods used in
international law and practice to determine the equidistance line."
In
his address to parliament, President Venetiaan stated that, if his
government was to present the findings of the platform to the Tribunal,
Suriname internationally would look like a fool. Several coalition
MPs agreed with the Head of State and eventually the motioned was
defeated.
National
Democratic Party (NDP) opposition leader Desi Bouterse who, since
day one after the ruling was made public, challenged the decision
and accused the government of not having done its utmost to defend
Suriname's national interest, did not attend parliament's session
on Thursday.
The
leader of the NDP even led several hundred angry fellow-countrymen
in a protest demonstration on Monday, October 1, calling on the
government to step down.
Bouterse
went so far as to suggest that President Venetiaan might be part
of a wide conspiracy to rob Suriname of its potential natural resources,
since the Head of State was reluctant to agree with his party to
formally challenge the award.
NDP's
member of parliament Jenny Geerlings-Simons maintained, however,
that Suriname should make reservations on several aspects of the
Tribunal's ruling, which in the future could lead to other border
issues with Guyana.
Simons
and Kenneth Moenne, NDP's faction leader in parliament, noted that
although the dismissal of its motion was a set back the party will
continue to scrutinise the boundary award.
Although
the formal discussion on this issue seemingly came to an end with
the debate on Thursday, this issue will be on the political agenda
for a long time to come.
On
Monday, former president Jules Wijdenbosch will also hold a press
meeting. In June 2000, then president Wijdenbosch took the decision
to evict a CGX oil drilling rig from the disputed area, which resulted
in a political stand-off between Guyana and Suriname. Ultimately,
in February 2004, Guyana took the matter to the UN for arbitration.
|