18/12 Report of the Working Group on the Universal Periodic Review - Suriname

GE.11-14597

Human Rights Council Eighteenth session Agenda item 6 Universal Periodic Review

Report of the Working Group on the Universal Periodic Review

Suriname*

* The annex to the present report is circulated as received.

United Nations A/HRC/18/12

General Assembly

Distr.: General 11 July 2011

Contents Paragraphs Page

Introduction ............................................................................................................... 1–4 3

I. Summary of the proceedings of the review process................................................. 5–71 3

A. Presentation by the State under review ............................................................ 5–31 3

B. Interactive dialogue and responses by the State under review ........................ 32–71 7

II. Conclusions and/or recommendations ...................................................................... 72–74 12

Annex

Composition of the delegation ............................................................................................................ 19

Introduction

1. The Working Group on the Universal Periodic Review, established in accordance with Human Rights Council resolution 5/1 of 18 June 2007, held its eleventh session from 2 to 13 May 2011. The review of Suriname was held at the 10th meeting on 6 May 2011. The delegation of Suriname was headed by Martin P. Misiedjan. At its 14th meeting held on 10 May 2011, the Working Group adopted the report on Suriname.

2. On 21 June 2010, the Human Rights Council selected the following group of rapporteurs (troika) to facilitate the review of Suriname: Mauritania, Qatar and Uruguay.

3. In accordance with paragraph 15 of the annex to resolution 5/1, the following documents were issued for the review of Suriname:

(a) A national report submitted/written presentation made in accordance with paragraph 15 (a) (A/HRC/WG.6/11/SUR/1);

(b) A compilation prepared by OHCHR in accordance with paragraph 15 (b) (A/HRC/WG.6/11/SUR/2);

(c) A summary prepared by OHCHR in accordance with paragraph 15 (c) (A/HRC/WG.6/11/SUR/3).

4. A list of questions prepared in advance by Belgium, the Czech Republic, France, Latvia, Netherlands, Norway, Slovenia ad the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland was transmitted to Suriname through the troika. These questions are available on the extranet of UPR.

I. Summary of the proceedings of the review process

A. Presentation by the State under review

5. The delegation stated that the Government of Suriname had undertaken many efforts to improve human rights standards in Suriname and appreciated the support it had received from national and international organizations as well as various United Nations treaty bodies. Suriname attached great importance to the universal periodic review mechanism. It valued the opportunity to assess its achievements and address challenges and constraints in the promotion and protection of human rights. In the preparation of its national report, an inter-ministerial commission was established in May 2010 and consultations were held with various relevant stakeholders.

6. Suriname thanked the Human Rights Council for the opportunity presented. It was convinced that this interaction and exchange of views would enable it to deal more capably and effectively with any shortcomings that might have still existed with regard to the full implementation on human rights conventions. The delegation stated that Suriname was determined to promote and guarantee all fundamental rights and freedoms to its people. It acknowledged the importance of the various reporting requirements as a means of monitoring the implementation of instruments that embodied universal human rights and fundamental freedoms and stated that its national report illustrated the progress that had been made in the past five years.

7. The human rights infrastructure of Suriname had both legal and institutional components, and Suriname was continuously working on improving them. In particular, the legislative bodies, Parliament and the State Council, were highly involved in the process of preparation and approval of legislative products. The delegation stated that specific issues

had been discussed in its national report, as well as the current state of affairs of those issues and the State party’s efforts in relation hereto.

8. The delegation nevertheless addressed some of the specific advance questions, posted by members of the Human Rights Council.

9. With regard to the question from Belgium and Latvia on issuing a standing invitation to the special procedures, the delegation stated that the special rapporteurs had the opportunity to send out missions to Suriname after consultations with the Government.

10. As to the question from Belgium, France and the Netherlands regarding ratification of human rights treaties and Optional Protocols to which it was not yet a party, the delegation stated that it was in the process of ratifying the Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities and the Optional Protocol to the Convention on the Rights of the Child on the involvement of children in armed conflict. Relevant draft laws had been submitted to Parliament for approval. Furthermore, the legislative process to approve the Optional Protocol to the Convention on the Rights of the Child on the sale of children, child prostitution and child pornography had been initiated.

11. With regard to the question of Belgium on whether or not Suriname was considering accepting the individual complaints procedure under the human rights treaties to which it was a party. To this question, the delegation indicated that Suriname had the utmost regard for the rule of law and human rights. Therefore, the State offered its citizens adequate legal protection at the national level, should that citizen feel that one or more of his human rights were violated. Given its international obligations regarding the human rights treaties to which it was a party, Suriname was reviewing its national legislation and policy and was considering modifications thereof. Taking into account the importance of the mechanism of the individual complaints procedure, Suriname was considering its acceptance.

12. As for the question posted by the Czech Republic and the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland, regarding steps Suriname had taken to establish a national human rights institution accredited by the International Coordinating Committee of National Institutions for the Promotion and Protection of Human Rights, the delegation stated that, even though at the current time no such institution existed in Suriname, the State provided the existing human rights institutions with full freedom to function as such, in accordance with the principles relating to the status of national institutions for the promotion and protection of human rights (Paris Principles), should they wish to do so.

13. The Czech Republic had also asked whether Suriname intended to raise the minimum age for criminal prosecution from the current age of 10 years. In that regard, the delegation stated that legislation had been drafted to raise the age of criminal responsibility from 10 to 12 years. This draft legislation had been submitted to Parliament for approval. In the meantime, the Office of the Attorney General did not prosecute offenders younger than 12 years of age.

14. The delegation pointed out that the Czech Republic, France and the Netherlands had noted that, while Suriname had not carried out judicial executions for almost 80 years, the death penalty remained on the books for the offences of murder and treason. The Czech Republic and the United Kingdom wished to know whether Suriname intended to abolish capital punishment. In that regard, the delegation stated that a draft modification of the Penal Code, in which the death penalty was removed, had been presented to the Council of Ministers and would subsequently be presented for approval to Parliament.

15. Concerning the questions from the Netherlands, Norway and the United Kingdom with respect to paragraph 130 of its national report, which referred to the initiatives that Maroons and indigenous people had taken against the Government of Suriname for their collective rights, the delegation stated that the Inter-American Court of Human Rights ruled

in 2007 that Suriname should recognize, among others, collective rights to land of the Saramaka people.

16. In that connection, the delegation indicated that Suriname had implemented several aspects of the Court’s judgment; other aspects called for more in-depth consultation with the communities concerned. Accordingly, the Government held weekly consultations with the representative authorities of Maroons and indigenous peoples on the land right issues. The consultations would continue in collaboration with relevant stakeholders and the private sector.

17. Implementation of the part of the judgment, which dealt with the amendment of laws and regulations, was pending. Suriname had requested information and technical assistance on best practices regarding the drafting of legislation on the issue and procedures to be enacted, including consultation procedures. In that regard, the delegation referred to the visit of the Special Rapporteur on the rights of indigenous people, James Anaya, to Suriname. He had shared his views with the Government of Suriname, and his report contained valuable insights on how to proceed in the matter.

18. Furthermore, the delegation stated that the Government of Suriname was considering convening a national conference on the issue. Suriname was determined to provide equitable treatment and equal opportunities to all of its citizens, and that would be the guiding principle in analysing information and reports and taking decisions.

19. The Netherlands had also asked in its advance questions whether Suriname was prepared to repeal dead letter laws restricting family planning activities and abortion services, as recommended by the Committee on the Elimination of Discrimination against Women in January 2007. The delegation indicated that the issue of abortion was still a highly controversial one, on which national consensus had not yet been reached.

20. The delegation indicated that the Netherlands, Norway and the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland had raised several issues regarding the position of lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender (LGBT) persons. The question had been posed as to which measures Suriname took in order to protect the rights of sexual minorities and to promote their emancipation. The delegation stated that the Surinamese law protected individuals against discrimination and that article 8 of the Constitution stipulated that nobody may be discriminated against. As to the specific question regarding LGBT persons, the delegation underlined that the matter had the Government’s attention. The main course of action would be to initiate a general discussion on that sensitive issue, involving all actors in society, including religious organizations and LGBT platform groups and individuals.

21. As for the question from Norway regarding the timeframe in which Suriname intended to ratify and implement the International Labour Organization Convention No. 169 (1989) concerning Indigenous and Tribal Peoples in Independent Countries, the delegation stated that the essence of that Convention was the recognition of the rights of indigenous people, including their collective land rights. Given the current state of affairs in relation to the consultative process, Suriname was not yet able to ratify the Convention No.

169.

22. For other question from Norway in relation to one of the 2007 recommendations of the Committee on the Rights of the Child concerning the establishment, as soon as possible, of an Ombudsperson or other independent body for the monitoring and implementation of the Convention on the Rights of the Child, the delegation informed that draft legislation on the establishment of a Children’s Ombudsbureau had been submitted to the State Council. After the State Council’s input had been received, the draft legislation would be submitted to the Parliament for approval.

23. Slovenia had asked which steps Suriname envisioned in order to further improve the accessibility and quality of primary education. The delegation indicated that Suriname had given great priority to building new schools in the interior. Two nucleus centres for distance learning had been established there. Public school education was free of charge; expectant mothers might remain in school and were given every opportunity to continue their education both during and after pregnancy. In order to ensure education to school dropouts, the Government also provided several vocational programmes. With regard to the quality of education, an improved 11-year basic education system was being piloted. The Government also supported several pre- and early school activities.

24. Slovenia had also asked which steps had been taken with regard to the elimination of violence against children. The delegation responded that there was legislation in place which provided for judicial intervention in case of abuse or other instances of violence against children. A ministerial decree forbade corporal punishment in schools; furthermore, a nationwide toll free phone hotline for minors had been re-established in 2008.

25. As to an update regarding the state of the December trials and the prospects for the conclusion of that case, the delegation reported that the trial was ongoing. Since the commencement of that trial, several defendants, witnesses and experts had been heard by the court. A number of witnesses still remained to be called and heard. Unfortunately, one of the judges of the Court had recently passed away. The process of replacing said judge was in its final stages. The trials were accessible to the public, the press and observers of human rights organizations. The delegation stated that the Government would not be able to give any concrete prospects as to the conclusion of this trial, since the issue would be decided by the independent court.

26. A question had also been posed regarding the current assessment of the state of prisons and other detention conditions in Suriname. The delegation acknowledged that even though significant improvements had been made in the past years, much was still left to be desired on these issues.

27. In 2007, significant progress had been made by the establishment of a special youth detention centre, where youth offenders were detained. That youth detention centre, named “Opa Doelie”, functioned according to the principles of the Convention on the Rights of the Child, which meant that the detained youth received schooling, recreation and professional guidance during the period of detention.

28. With regard to adults in detention, significant improvement had been made. The jails connected to the several police stations had been renovated. While there were still instances of overcrowding, it had been greatly reduced. The larger jails received daily nurse visits. In case of urgent medical circumstances, detainees were transported by ambulance to the emergency room. The detainees generally spent the better part of the day outside the cells. They received three meals a day and provisions were made for religious or medical meals.

29. The delegation emphasized that Suriname recognized that a great deal was still to be done with regard to the housing of detainees and prisoners. A Special Rapporteur on the rights of persons deprived of liberty of the Organization of American States would visit Suriname at the end of May 2011, which demonstrated the willingness of Suriname to further improve the conditions of all detainees.

30. The United Kingdom had asked about the views of the Government of Suriname regarding further enhancement of women’s rights and protection. The delegation indicated that the policy of the Government of Suriname was geared to a stronger partnership with the civil society in the formulation and implementation of the policy to enhance women’s rights and protection in Suriname.

31. The delegation stated that it had received detailed advance questions from various delegations and thanked them for their interest in the human rights situation in Suriname. The delegation indicated that Suriname remained firmly committed to the promotion and protection of all human rights and looked forward to a constructive and cooperative interaction and discussion with council members regarding its universal periodic review.

B. Interactive dialogue and responses by the State under review

32. During the interactive dialogue, 30 delegations made statements. The delegation of Suriname was thanked for its presentation of the report and the consultations undertaken in its preparation, for responses to questions and for its engagement in the universal periodic review process. Recommendations made during the dialogue are found in chapter II of the present report.

33. Indonesia noted that widespread poverty remained a major problem in Suriname and a challenge to development and progress in the area of human rights. It observed that Suriname was on track to meet millennium development goal 2 on achieving universal primary education. It further noted that gender disparity was a major challenge in the country’s education system and that the Government was working towards creating a national human rights institution. Indonesia made recommendations.

34. Thailand welcomed the attention paid by Suriname to the rights of vulnerable groups. It noted the complex situation faced as a country of origin, transit and destination for human trafficking and irregular migration. It also noted progress in the field of HIV/AIDS prevention and treatment. Thailand stated that it attached particulars importance to the improvement of prison conditions for women prisoners and shared concerns regarding poor prison conditions. It made recommendations.

35. Malaysia congratulated Suriname on the broad-based approach in the preparatory process leading to its universal periodic review and noted that such inclusiveness would also be a part of the follow-up phase. While commending Suriname for its close cooperation and constructive engagement with bilateral, regional and multilateral partners, Malaysia referred to education, health and women’s and children’s rights as key areas in which Suriname faced challenges. Malaysia made recommendations.

36. India noted measures taken to protect women’s rights and expressed appreciation, in particular, for training and access to microcredit finance for women entrepreneurs in the agricultural sector. Regarding education, it expressed concern about the existence of geographical, gender and socio-economic disparities. India asked if measures taken in that regard had led to visible impact on the ground. India encouraged Suriname to ratify the Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities and to consider establishing a national human rights institution in full compliance with the principles relating to the status of national institutions for the promotion and protection of human rights (Paris Principles).

37. Slovenia commended Suriname for the comprehensive preparations undertaken in the preparations for the review. It wished to obtain information on Suriname’s plans to improve accessibility and quality of education, particularly in the hinterland of the country, as well as on steps taken to eliminate violence against children. Slovenia made recommendations.

38. Algeria welcomed the intersectoral approach adopted by Suriname to promoting human rights, referring to the framework of the Multiannual Development Plan of 2006–

2011. It noted the numerous challenges Suriname faced and stated that women remained a minority in the highest positions in the public and the private sphere. It mentioned the need to give particular attention to the protection of child rights as well as that of vulnerable groups, especially those living in the countryside. Algeria made recommendations.

39. The Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela acknowledged the negative impact of the economic crisis on the country’s economy. It noted Surinamese efforts in the area of combating violence against children and young people and referred, in that regard, to the establishment of a Women and Child Policy Bureau, and a National Commission for the Eradication of Child Labour, in 2007 and 2009 respectively. It made a recommendation.

40. Canada welcomed the Government’s priority focus on children’s rights. It noted that women remained uniquely vulnerable and that trafficking remains a problem. Canada welcomed efforts to give effect to the rights of the Amerindian and Maroon, noting, however, that recognition of rights was often at the individual level, disregarding collective rights. Canada noted with concern reports of poor prison conditions and mistreatment of prisoners as well as the fact that the death penalty remained in place, though it had not been applied in over 80 years. Canada made recommendations.

41. France noted that the legislation still provided for the death penalty in certain cases, even though a moratorium had been in place since 1982. It mentioned the concerns of the Human Rights Committee in 2004 regarding human rights violations committed under the military regime and impunity of perpetrators, and referred particularly to the extrajudicial executions of December 1982 and the Moiwana massacre in 1986. France also highlighted the issue of corporal punishment and ill-treatment of children. Finally, it noted discrimination against women. France made recommendations.

42. The United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland acknowledged the record of Suriname in many areas discussed during the universal periodic review and expressed the hope that, in future, greater attention could be given to LGBT issues and rights in the national report. It encouraged Suriname to devote attention to issues relating to prison and detention conditions. It made recommendations.

43. Cuba noted challenges faced by Suriname in relation to the world economic crisis, its recent colonial past and the international exploitation by industrialized countries. It acknowledged Surinamese efforts in the area of human rights, particularly to combat gender inequality, improve the field of health (including achievements in the prevention and treatment of HIV/AIDS and malaria) and promote primary education. Cuba made recommendations.

44. Norway noted the impressive level of racial harmony in the country. It observed that Suriname had stated that it would comply with the 2007 judgment of the Inter-American Court of Human Rights in the Saramaka case. It recognized efforts to attain equality between men and women. Norway expressed concern about trafficking and sexual exploitation of minors. Norway made recommendations.

45. Hungary expressed concern at the slow pace of judicial reform towards achieving de jure equality for women. It also noted reports of discrimination against women in employment. Hungary also noted reports that Suriname was a destination, source and transit country for trafficking. It commended Suriname for efforts in recognizing the collective rights of indigenous peoples but remained concerned about their plight, in particular regarding land rights and reports of illegal logging and mining in indigenous areas. Hungary made recommendations.

46. Brazil noted with appreciation several gender-related programmes, as well as initiatives to promote the rights of the elderly and to combat HIV/AIDS, particularly the provision of antiretroviral medication. It noted that physical and sexual abuse of children remained a challenge and commended initiatives on this issue. Brazil recalled the establishment of a bilateral working group on migration and consular issues and areas of bilateral cooperation with Suriname such as health, education and school feeding. Brazil made recommendations.

47. Argentina welcomed significant progress achieved in the prevention and treatment of HIV in pregnant women. Additionally, it welcomed achievements in the last 10 years in reducing deaths from malaria. Argentina also welcomed the information that Suriname had decided to ratify the Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities and the Optional Protocol to the Convention on the Rights of the Child on the sale of children, child prostitution and child pornography. It asked about progress made through measures adopted to investigate human rights violations during the military regime. Argentina made recommendations.

48. Australia welcomed the establishment of the National Commission for the Eradication of Child Labour in 2009 and encouraged Suriname to take steps to ensure that the Commission could effectively carry out its mandate. It welcomed action in 2010 to allow prisoners to submit their complaints to judicial authorities without censorship and encouraged the authorities to act on such complaints. Australia, nevertheless, expressed concern at reportedly declining prison conditions in the country. Australia made recommendations.

49. The Netherlands commended Suriname on the candour of its national report and appreciated answers provided to questions. It noted several initiatives to promote gender equality, such as, the ratification of the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women, the criminalization of marital rape and certain research projects described in its report. It acknowledged significant changes in the justice system in the past few years. It also noted that the national report did not address the position of LGBT persons. It made recommendations.

50. Germany requested information on how Suriname had followed up to the Human Rights Committee’s recommendation to reduce the number of persons in detention and to improve prison conditions, on the country’s policy towards national minorities (i.e., the Amerindians and the Maroons) and the implementation of the 2007 decision of the Inter- American Court of Human Rights on collective landownership, how Suriname had followed up to the Committee on the Rights of the Child’s recommendation to adopt the revised Penal Code which raised the age of criminal responsibility. Germany made a recommendation.

51. China thanked Suriname for its report and noted with appreciation that the Government had, by improving its legal system, strengthened national institutions which sought to promote and protect human rights. It also noted efforts made to promote gender equality and the situation of its vulnerable groups. China expressed understanding of the challenges faced by Suriname with regard to education and health because of its development level and called on the international community to provide it with constructive assistance to help it attain the Millennium Development Goals.

52. Spain acknowledged Suriname’s efforts in the promotion and protection of human rights and referred, in that regard, to the establishment of the Human Rights Bureau within the Ministry of Justice and Police and the Women and Child Policy Bureau. Spain also welcomed the Surinamese co-sponsorship to the joint statement to stop violence and related human rights violations against people, based on their sexual orientation and gender identity, during the sixteenth session of the Human Rights Council. Spain made recommendations.

53. Chile noted that the Surinamese national report acknowledged that the implementation of treaty bodies’ recommendations and the decisions of the Inter-American Court of Human Rights represented one of the main challenges to its human rights policy. It therefore considered that cooperation with the multilateral protection system requires technical assistance of the United Nations. Chile congratulated Suriname for its achievements in the prevention of the transmittal of HIV from mother to child. It asked for

details regarding the content and implementation of the National Gender Action Plan. Chile made recommendations.

54. Maldives noted the efforts of Suriname in the promotion and protection of women and children’s rights. It recognized the challenge to provide uniform education to children in rural and urban areas, acknowledging efforts made. While understanding the immense challenges and capacity constraints faced by small island developing countries, particularly least developing countries, it considered open and transparent engagement with international partners as key to overcoming these challenges. Maldives made recommendations.

55. The United States of America expressed concern that Surinamese laws did not afford any special protection for or recognition of indigenous people and that indigenous persons continued to be disadvantaged in a number of areas. It also noted problems faced by indigenous persons with illegal and uncontrolled mining on their lands. Furthermore, it was concerned about trafficking in persons to and from Suriname and urged Suriname to enhance efforts to identify and assist victims, increase awareness-raising efforts and offer foreign victims legal alternatives to deportation. It made recommendations.

56. Trinidad and Tobago appreciated the efforts made by Suriname for the promotion and protection of human rights, particularly with regard to women, children and young people’s rights. In that regard, it also recalled the establishment of the Human Rights Bureau within the Ministry of Justice and Police, the National Bureau for Gender Policy, the Women and Child Policy Bureau and the National Youth Institute. Trinidad and Tobago made recommendations.

57. Mexico acknowledged efforts by Suriname to implement treaty body recommendations. It also highlighted work carried out towards the adoption of a law to combat domestic violence, to support the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples and to prepare a draft law on the rights of indigenous peoples. Mexico made recommendations.

58. Belgium commended Suriname for launching several projects in partnership with United Nations agencies. However, it noted that tangible progress was lacking, in particular with respect to the promotion of women and children rights. Belgium inquired about the measures that Suriname planned to take to fight against sexual exploitation of women and children, a too frequent phenomenon that provided a fertile ground for the development of human trafficking networks. It also referred to the de facto moratorium on death penalty since 1982 and the signature by Suriname of the American Convention on Human Rights (Pact of San José). Belgium made recommendations.

59. Slovakia commended Suriname for prioritizing children’s rights and the adoption and implementation of key legislation and concrete measures to address the issue. It noted reports of discrimination suffered by indigenous peoples and the lack of specific legislative framework to guarantee the realization of their rights. It also noted that Committee on the Elimination of Discrimination against Women had observed that the pace of legal reforms was slow and that there was a lack of progress in attaining women’s de jure equality. Slovakia made recommendations.

60. Ecuador welcomed Surinamese efforts to consult with and to include civil society in the preparation of its national report. It recalled that Suriname was a country rich in natural resources, racially and ethnically diverse, with a high percentage of its population from indigenous and tribal groups. Ecuador made recommendations.

61. Barbados noted progress in promoting issues relating to gender equality. It also observed that the law had been revised in accordance with the Protocol to Prevent, Suppress and Punish Trafficking in Persons, Especially Women and Children. It additionally noted

the reduction of absolute poverty, improved access to safe drinking water and continued efforts for the achievement of universal primary enrolment. Barbados suggested that Suriname accelerate the process of treaty ratification and called on treaty bodies and the Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights to provide technical assistance for the implementation of treaties.

62. Jamaica noted initiatives of Suriname undertaken over the last two years, including the establishment of the Human Rights Bureau, and activities carried out in collaboration with the United Nations Development Programme to strengthen the framework for the promotion and protection of human rights, including a human rights assessment, capacity- building and a media communication strategy. Jamaica further noted the special focus being given to vulnerable groups such as women, children, youth and the elderly, as well as the emphasis being placed on education and health.

63. The delegation thanked the States for their comments and took note of the concerns that still remained, such as education in the interior, the rights of indigenous peoples and Maroons, especially their collective human rights and land rights, the rights of women and children, death penalty, prison conditions, ratification of treaties and so forth.

64. The delegation underscored that, despite financial and economical constraints, promoting and protecting human rights was of great value to Suriname and that it had committed itself to enhancing human rights. It was engaged in the process of discussing and collaborating with non-governmental organizations. It was also working with fellow countries to learn from them, and the opportunity for the universal periodic review was a process from which it was learning.

65. As for education, the delegation furthermore stated that the situation in the capital and other areas in Suriname was quite acceptable, while serious concerns remained in the interior, because of the fact that those were rural areas and very deep in the Amazon rainforest. One particular problem was finding qualified teachers willing to go there and work in hard conditions. Those were the matters being looked at carefully, and projects and programmes were being developed by the Ministry of Education.

66. On the issue of abolition of death penalty, the delegation reiterated that the Penal Code was being revised. The draft revised Penal Code contained no reference to capital punishment.

67. The delegation stated that it had concrete plans to involve stakeholders in its commitment to indigenous peoples and Maroons concerning their collective land rights, because Suriname was very diverse and there were more than six ethnic groups. Suriname would like all these groups to be involved in the process to reach the solution for the issue of Maroons and indigenous peoples. The delegation furthermore stated that the situation in Suriname was somewhat different from other Latin American countries which had indigenous peoples. The Maroon community in Suriname was not small and in fact larger than indigenous communities, and they had been living in the interior for more than three hundred years. The judgment of the Inter-American Court of Human Rights stated that they should have the same rights as indigenous peoples. In some areas, there was a clear overlap of land rights matters. Therefore, it was just not a matter of copying what had happened in other countries in the region. Suriname needed to find a Surinamese solution, and that was why Suriname would ask for some time to deal with this matter.

68. Regarding prison and detention conditions, much progress had been made, however, Suriname was making every effort to make the situation better, particularly in lock-ups and the police detention facilities.

69. As for ratification of international human rights instruments, the process in many countries was lengthy, and Suriname at the current stage still had a way to go in ratifying

the Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment, the Optional Protocols to the Convention on the Rights of the Child and the Convention on the Protection of the Rights of Persons with Disabilities.

70. As to migrant workers in Suriname, the delegation indicated that they were involved in gold-mining in hinterlands in the interior inhabited by Maroons and indigenous peoples. By dealing with migrant workers’ issues, Suriname needed to take into consideration the land rights of indigenous peoples and Maroons. If assistance was needed, Suriname would ask for it, as it did by asking James Anaya to come over to Suriname to look at the issues of land rights of the indigenous and Maroons peoples.

71. In conclusion, the delegation stated that there were many issues that needed further consideration and that it was willing to do so. It welcomed the universal periodic review, which represented a learning opportunity for the country. All the comments and suggestions would be reviewed and examined. Suriname was committed to the promotion and protection of human rights.

II. Conclusions and/or recommendations

72. The recommendations formulated during the interactive dialogue and listed below enjoy the support Suriname:

72.1. Conclude the ratification process of the relevant Optional Protocols to the Convention on the Rights of the Child (Spain);

72.2. Consider ratifying those main international instruments to which it is not party, particularly the Optional Protocols to the Convention on the Rights of the Child and conclude the ratification process of the Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (Ecuador);

72.3. Complete its international commitments to protect and promote human rights by acceding to the relevant international instruments, in particular to the two Optional Protocols to the Convention on the Rights of the Child (France);

72.4. Incorporate human rights education into the school curricula (Indonesia);

72.5. Initiate awareness-raising campaigns and programmes on human rights in general and on the rights of women and children in particular (Malaysia);

72.6. Strengthen further national policies against HIV/AIDS, aiming at universal access to prevention, treatment, care and support (Brazil);

72.7. Work with the Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights to prepare a common core document as a way to streamline and reduce the burden of treaty-reporting (Maldives);

72.8. Continue to work with the Special Rapporteur on the rights of indigenous persons (United States of America);

72.9. Promote initiatives aimed at ensuring that there is employment stability for pregnant women (Mexico);

72.10. Strengthen further the capacity of the National Bureau of Gender Policy (Netherlands);

72.11. Continue efforts to promote and protect the rights of women, children and juveniles and overcome their vulnerability (Cuba);

72.12. Investigate thoroughly all allegations of mistreatment of prisoners (Canada);

72.13. Improve prison conditions, including by responding effectively to prisoners’ complaints (Australia);

72.14 Take steps to reduce prison overcrowding, and to ensure that food rations for prisoners meet international standards (Canada);

72.15 Continue its efforts to enhance the position of women and to provide protection from violence, including by the full implementation of the 2009 Law on Combating Domestic Violence (United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland);

72.16 Step up implementation and enforcement of relevant legislation and other measures to curb instances of domestic violence, child abuse and the sexual exploitation of women and girls (Malaysia);

72.17 Develop a comprehensive anti-human trafficking strategy and adopt the legislation necessary to implement it (Canada);

72.18. Develop a comprehensive and coherent national strategy and plan of action to combat human trafficking of women and children (Thailand);

72.19 Pay more attention to the fight against trafficking in children and their sexual exploitation (Algeria);

72.20. Investigate vigorously and prosecute trafficking offences (United States of America),

72.21. Prohibit all forms of violence against children, in particular corporal punishment, which is still legally practised in schools (Belgium);

72.22. Strengthen and apply poverty reduction strategies to ensure disadvantaged communities have access to adequate shelter, food, health care and education (Indonesia);

72.23. Strengthen the poverty reduction programmes by paying specific attention to the economic, social and cultural rights of the most disadvantaged and fighting against regional disparities in terms of their development (Algeria);

72.24. Continue implementing programmes and measures to enhance the enjoyment of the right to education and the right to health (Cuba);

72.25. Continue to improve both the quality and accessibility of education and related facilities (Indonesia);

72.26. Continue and step up efforts to improve school enrolment and the quality of education (Slovenia);

72.27. Continue efforts to guarantee better implementation of education plans particularly in rural areas (Ecuador);

72.28. Continue efforts aimed at improving access to education, particularly in the rural areas, including by, inter alia, increasing the number of teachers, ensuring adequate infrastructure, learning materials and educational tools (Malaysia);

72.29. Continue efforts to implement legislation that takes into account the needs of boys and girls in general, including equal access to universal primary education, as well as, in particular, that of boys and girls with disabilities (Argentina);

72.30. Take expeditiously efficient steps to improve access to free basic education to all children, with particular focus on those living in the interior areas and those belonging to indigenous and minority groups (Slovakia);

72.31. Continue its dialogue with indigenous persons (United States of America);

72.32. Continue to seek assistance from the international community, with the support of the United Nations country team, in strengthening its human rights policies and implementing the universal periodic review recommendations, particularly in building capacity for its human rights officers (Thailand);

72.33. Seek out international technical assistance and cooperation and use this to consolidate the National Policy for Children and Youth with an infrastructure that meets its needs and the participation of all sectors in the society in the fight for the recognition of children’s rights, with particular attention to those who are placed in a situation of extreme vulnerability (Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela);

73. The following recommendations will be examined by Suriname which will provide responses in due time, but no later than the eighteenth session of the Human Rights Council in September 2011:

73.1 Consider the progressive ratification of the main international human rights treaties that are still pending, which may require technical assistance (Chile);

73.2. Ratify outstanding core international human rights instruments and abolish the death penalty (Slovenia);

73.3. Ratify the Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment (United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland);

73.4. Consider ratifying the Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment and its Optional Protocol, and the Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (Brazil);

73.5. Conclude the ratification process of the Optional Protocol to the Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (Spain);

73.6. Consider ratifying those main international instruments to which it is not party, particularly the Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment and its Optional Protocol, the International Convention on the Protection of the Rights of All Migrant Workers and Members of Their Families, the Optional Protocols to the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights and the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights and to the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women (Ecuador);

73.7. Study the possibility of ratifying the Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment; the International Convention for the Protection of All Persons from Enforced Disappearance; the International Convention on the Protection of the Rights of

All Migrant Workers and Members of Their Families; and the Second Optional Protocol to the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, aiming at the abolition of the death penalty (Argentina);

73.8. Complete its international commitments to protect and promote human rights by acceding to the relevant international instruments, in particular to the Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment and the Optional Protocol to the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women (France);

73.9. Ratify the 1954 Convention relating to the Status of Stateless Persons and the 1961 Convention on the Reduction of Statelessness (Slovakia);

73.10. Ratify the International Labour Organization Convention No. 169 (1989) concerning Indigenous and Tribal Peoples in Independent Countries (Norway);

73.11. Ratify the International Labour Organization Convention No. 169 (1989) concerning Indigenous and Tribal Peoples in Independent Countries in order to ensure greater protection, as it is merited, by the special situation of indigenous and tribal population of the country, and consequently in this vein, comply with the decision of the Inter-American Court of Human Rights regarding their collective titles to property (Ecuador);

73.12. Review national legislation, in particular the Nationality and Residence Act, the Penal Code and the Personal Act, so as to repeal provisions that could facilitate discrimination (Mexico);

73.13. Establish a national human rights institution (Maldives);

73.14. Establish a national human rights institution in accordance with the principles relating to the status of national institutions for the promotion and protection of human rights (Paris Principles) (Indonesia, Spain);

73.15. Establish a national human rights institution to protect and promote human rights in accordance with the existing international standards (Algeria);

73.16. Extend an open and standing invitation to the special procedures (Ecuador, Spain);

73.17. Extend standing invitation to the United Nations human rights special procedures (Maldives);

73.18. Issue a standing invitation to the United Nations special procedure mandate holders (Slovenia);

73.19. Consider extending an open and standing invitation to the special procedures of the United Nations, which may contribute to interactive cooperation with the system (Chile);

73.20. Promote effectively equality between men and women (France);

73.21. Address gender disparity proactively (Indonesia);

73.22. Repeal all discriminatory provisions against women in domestic legislation, fully incorporating the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women into the national legal framework (Slovakia);

73.23. Develop further and implement policies and legislation aimed at gender equality, particularly with regard to acquisition of nationality and to sexual or domestic violence (Brazil);

73.24. Provide all the necessary measures to improve the participation of women in public life and in the political and economic spheres (Algeria);

73.25. Promote initiatives aimed at ensuring that there are equal conditions of employment for women (Mexico);

73.26. Introduce gender as an issue in the school curriculum in order to combat stereotypes and cultural factors to inequality (Norway);

73.27. Address awareness campaigns at both men and women, to project positive images of women and of the equal status and responsibilities of men and women in the private and public spheres (Hungary);

73.28. Increase its efforts to attain equality of rights between men and women, including through awareness raising activities to combat patriarchal cultural practices and gender stereotypes that undermine the exercise of such rights (Argentina);

73.29. Continue to conduct awareness-raising campaigns promoting equal conditions and equal responsibilities between women and men both in the private and public sphere with the aim of abolishing the persistence of patriarchal and stereotypical attitudes and achieving greater representation of women in the decision-making and managerial positions (Spain);

73.30. Adopt and implement efficient measures to eliminate discrimination on any grounds and against all vulnerable groups, with particular care on indigenous population (Slovakia);

73.31. Establish the legal conditions that are necessary in order to avoid discrimination of Maroons and indigenous peoples in terms of socio-economic development, health status, and access to health care (Germany);

73.32. Repeal the death penalty (Canada);

73.33. Abolish definitively death penalty (France);

73.34. Abolish the death penalty and sign and ratify the Second Optional Protocol to the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (Spain);

73.35. Accede to the Second Optional Protocol to the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights and abolish definitively death penalty (Belgium);

73.36. Approve pending amendments to the Penal Code to abolish the death penalty (Netherlands);

73.37. Formalize its longstanding non-use of capital punishment by abolishing all legal provisions for capital punishment (United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland);

73.38. Implement institutional reforms to abolish current provisions on the death penalty (Ecuador);

73.39. Implement the recommendations of the Human Rights Committee, by prosecuting and sentencing as appropriate the perpetrators of the extrajudicial executions of December 1982 and the Moiwana massacre in 1986 (France);

73.40. Take steps to improve the treatment of women prisoners by, inter alia, circulating the United Nations Rules for the Treatment of Women Prisoners

and Non-custodial Measures for Women Offenders (the Bangkok Rules) and to seek assistance from the Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights and the United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime in implementing them (Thailand);

73.41. Adopt swiftly the necessary legislation and develop a comprehensive anti-trafficking strategy and plan of action to combat trafficking of children and women, especially for the purpose of sexual exploitation (Hungary);

73.42. Provide enhanced training to law enforcement, immigration and judicial officials regarding trafficking cases and victims, and provide foreign victims of trafficking with legal alternatives to deportation (United States of America);

73.43. Take steps to ensure that the National Commission for the Eradication of Child Labour can effectively carry out its mandate (Australia);

73.44. Prohibit explicitly corporal punishment at school, at home, as well as in any public establishment attended by children (France);

73.45. Adopt the necessary legal measures to prohibit all forms of violence against children, including corporal punishment in all settings, particularly in the family, schools, alternative childcare and places of detention for juveniles (Mexico);

73.46. Follow up efficiently on the recommendation of the Committee on the Rights of the Child to explicitly prohibit by law all forms of violence against children, including corporal punishment, in all settings, including in the family, schools, alternative childcare and places of detention for juveniles, and to subsequently implement those laws effectively (Slovenia);

73.47. Prioritize the creation of school facilities in remote areas and implement a functioning system of data collection on children living in districts bordering neighbouring countries (Norway);

73.48. Adopt the revised Penal Code – in keeping with the recommendation of the Convention on the Rights of the Child – which raises the age of criminal responsibility (Trinidad and Tobago);

73.49. Equalize the age of consent for opposite and same-sex conduct, and adopt appropriate legislative and other measures to prohibit discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation and gender identity (Norway);

73.50. Equalize the age of consent for opposite and same-sex conduct, and adopt legislative and other measures to explicitly prohibit discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation and gender identity (Netherlands);

73.51. Develop concrete measures to enhance and monitor the level of access and quality of health-care services for women (Trinidad and Tobago);

73.52. Continue efforts to recognize and uphold the collective rights of the indigenous peoples (Trinidad and Tobago);

73.53. Recognize the collective rights of indigenous peoples to their lands and resources, giving the matter priority when the issue of land rights is raised in Parliament as indicated in the Government’s statement in October 2010 (Canada);

73.54. Acknowledge legally the rights of indigenous and tribal peoples to own, develop, control and use their lands, resources and communal territories according to customary law and traditional land-tenure system (Hungary);

73.55. Take the necessary steps to act in compliance with the verdict rendered in 2007 by the Inter-American Court of Human Rights in the Saramaka People case and to respect the right of indigenous people and Maroons to land (Norway);

73.56. Ensure that its indigenous communities, as far as possible, benefit fully from the provision of public services and that their land rights are legally recognized, including via implementation of the 2008 decision of the Inter- American Court of Human Rights (United Kingdom);

73.57. Execute fully the judgement of the Inter-American Court of Human Rights regarding logging and mining concessions in the territory of the Saramaka people and enshrine land rights of indigenous and Maroon groups in the Surinamese legal framework (Netherlands);

73.58. Ensure the enjoyment of all human rights by migrants, and further strengthen efforts aiming at their regularization (Brazil).

74. All conclusions and/or recommendations contained in the present report reflect the position of the submitting State(s) and/or the State under review. They should not be construed as endorsed by the Working Group as a whole.

Annex

Composition of the delegation

The delegation of Suriname was headed by His Excellency Martin P. Misiedjan, LLM, Minister of Justice and Police, and composed of the following members:

• His Excellency Henry Mac Donald, LLM, Ambassador / Permanent Representative of the Republic of Suriname at the United Nations, New York;

• His Excellency Ewald Limon, Ambassador/Policy Advisor at the Ministry of Foreign Affairs;

• Mrs. Lydia Ravenberg LLM, Public Prosecutor;

• Mrs. Marjory Sanches LLM, Policy Advisor at the Ministry of Justice and Police;

• Ms. Jornell Vinkwolk LLM, Chief of the Human Rights Bureau, Ministry of Justice and Police; and

• Ms. Meryll Malone LLB, Political Officer at the Ministry of Foreign Affairs;