 
#

Sylvana van den Braak

CENSORSHIP IN SURINAM

Eva Tas Foundation | Amsterdam

# Dedication

For my parents Frans van den Braak and Henriëtte van Riet and my brother Gianni van den Braak. They always supported me and taught me to undertake everything with passion. And for Alphons van den Braak. Alphons was a young man who, when he had a job at a greengrocers, refused to sell Outspan oranges while wearing a T-shirt with the text: Don't exploit a South African; who persuaded people to sell their mopeds to save the environment, and who tried to help create a better world as a Third World shop attendant and as a newspaper writer. In short: a man who fought for his convictions.

# Preface

The title of this booklet is _A Fri Wortu,_ which is an expression in Sranan Tongo. It means The Free Word. Sranan is a crude street language. It is known to be honest, even a bit rough from time to time. The official language in Surinam is Dutch which is spoken by people working for the government and the media. Dutch is also the language of instruction at schools.

This booklet is the elaboration of the thesis I wrote about press freedom in Surinam which – in turn – was based upon my five-month internship at _Parbode Magazine_. During this internship I fell in love with the country, its culture and people, as well as with all the colleagues involved in journalism. The story I wrote is above all a tribute to all those brave journalists who – day in, day out – attempt to produce first class journalism. My cooperation with, and talking to, so many passionate journalists, who, despite many setbacks, continued to fight for press freedom, for freedom of expression, and for high quality reporting, inspired me beyond measure.

When I flew back from _Switi Sranan_ to Holland on 27 January 2014, I simply could not get Surinam out of my mind. I sincerely hope that you will enjoy reading this booklet as much as I enjoyed writing it. I wish you a lot of reading pleasure, in Sranan: _Mik wang swite leisi presir_! However, I must admit that the word 'pleasure' is not very appropriate given the contents of this booklet.

Sylvana van den Braak

Amsterdam, May, 2017.

# Introduction

_'Put Surinam in context, Sylvana._ This is, time and again, what an inspiring Surinamese journalist emphasized during my research of journalism in Surinam. Taking this advice at heart, I kindly request the reader to read the following attentively and to keep it in mind when reading this booklet:

Surinam is growing every day. Every week, every day, there are new developments. One simply can't compare this county with any other country, as it is still so young. Every country is undergoing a process of change and development. This insight is often forgotten, since many Western countries have already centuries of development behind them. At the present time a lot of developments take place in Surinam. I have done my best to capture them in this booklet. As one can read, the country is growing, but this goes with ups and downs. At any event, I believe that Surinam possesses a great deal of zxpotential.

Second home

Surinam, a small and for many people, an unknown country in South America, is perhaps the most impressive and extraordinary country I know. Its warm inhabitants, Surinamese _poku_ , its delicious food and its pure jungle; in short, never in my life have I encountered such warmth and wealth. The moment you arrive at the airport, you smell the typical tropical Amazon smell. You feel the heat that makes you sweat which some people find unpleasant. But for me it felt like coming home: Surinam is my 'second home'!

On 5 September 2013 I flew for the first time to Paramaribo, Surinam's capital, for my internship as a journalist at the _Parbode Magazine._ I was amazed to encounter a completely different environment, countrywise and workwise. My new colleagues told me a lot of stories about their profession and about press freedom. Gradually I realized how much more difficult it is to write in a critical fashion in Surinam as compared to my home country, The Netherlands.

Factors

There are three universal factors that are crucial for journalists to report freely. The first factor concerns the _legal framework:_ does the law allow journalists to publish all collected information and at the same time does the law provide protection for journalists? The second factor is _political freedom_. This concerns how this freedom is enacted in law and how this freedom can be enjoyed in practice. Finally, there is the third factor: economic freedom. This factor is often forgotten. The central question is: does the media environment pay its journalists sufficiently to allow them to do their work independently, so that they are immune to bribes and other corrupt practices, and free from pressure from politicians and entrepreneurs. True, a lot has improved as regards press freedom, but how much leeway does the press have, and even more important, how much does the Surinamese press claim at present?

Journalism in Surinam is as fertile as the country's soil. It has the characteristics of journalism at the local level. As a result of Surinam's small population, the journalist is in a position to tell personal stories which are quite easily recognized by many readers. Moreover, there is a multitude of extraordinary material available that has not yet reported or even discovered. What a journalist writes about can make the difference. On the other hand, there are hindrances and setbacks journalists are confronted with in their day-to-day work. The influence exerted by politicians and entrepreneurs come to mind in this respect. And there is the issue of the poor salaries that journalists earn; the downside of a small community; self-censorship and poor schooling.

These factors are just a few of many that impinge upon journalism; together they create an adverse reporting environment. The biggest problem is that all the factors put together, perpetuate the situation. Given this adverse environment, journalists do not only encounter hindrances in the execution of their work, but they also apply self-censorship. It is difficult to ignore the drawbacks. There is not a single solution as the situation is quite complex.

As a consequence of the limited quality of journalism and limited press freedom, the citizens do not always receive the objective information they need to form their own opinion. This is an affront to democracy. In the following chapters the factors dealt with in this introduction will be elaborated.

Nita Ramcharan: 'The fact that Leslie lost his life because he defended the free word is the reason that I chose this profession. I continue his work'.

After the former fiancé of Nita Ramcharan was deprived of life during the December murders in the 80s, she decided to swap her job as a teacher for journalist. After having been editor at the _Ware Tijd_ , she has set up her own newsite _Star News_. Her biggest motivation for this was the influence of media owners on the journalistic content. With _Star News_ she wants to do it differently, which means for her: journalism without hidden agendas.

# Chapter 1 Blind Eyes

Surinam is a young country, having gained independence in 1975. The country has lived through a lot of experiences. This chapter describes the history of the Surinamese press: a succession of periods of relative press freedom and periods of strict censorship.

Colonial period

The very first newspaper in Surinam, the _Weeklijksche Surinaamse Courant (the Surinam Weekly),_ was established in 1774. It was almost immediately forbidden by the _West Indische Compagnie_ (WIC). Towards the end of the 18th century a journalistic culture developed in which there was room for critical minds and press freedom.

At the beginning of the 19th century, the environment changed. The newspaper became a mouthpiece for the government, and was actually suspended from 1843 to 1846. In 1852 the newspaper reported both in Dutch and in Sranan Tongo. Articles written in Sranan Tongo, accessible to slaves, were censored by scrapping some texts that could cause trouble. In 1865 censorship was lifted. Nonetheless, journalists could still be accused of writing texts that were unacceptable and some were even incarcerated. Advertisements were suspended.

On 1 July 1863 slavery was banned. The formation of the colonial state of Surinam and the reinstatement of press freedom resulted in an inspiring environment for the press. The _West Indiër_ appeared on the market; it was the first newspaper that had the fortitude to criticize the Dutch colonizers. It must be mentioned, however, that there was still corruption and government control. After 1945, newspapers reported what they deemed fit; they reported in a censorship-free environment. The contents of the newspapers reflected what was going on in the society and commented upon it, triggering public debate. In other words, they performed the central function of the press.

During the final years of Dutch colonialism in Surinam the society was relatively small, and news spread through _mofokoranti_ (the grapevine). The news and comments were directed at persons rather than at the society at large or at the body politic. All newspapers were connected to a particular political movement. As a result, there was in fact no independent journalism, which negatively impinged upon the quality of reporting. Newspapers acted as mouthpieces for the different political parties. Gradually, new newspapers entered the market; the press environment became more varied.

_De Ware Tijd_ ( _The True Time_ ) tried to apply independent journalism and – being the first – emphasized reporting on local issues. New groups of readers were reached; a new journalistic approach was formed and the independence of the press was developed.

Surinam's Independence and coup d'état

During the 1970s a large number of new weeklies reported critically about social problems. This was promoted by the sense of openness after the Pengel administration had ended. 1 These newspapers revealed issues which the government would have preferred to have kept secret. On 25 February 1980, the military launched a _coup d'_ é _tat._ During the coup grenades were thrown at the building of the evening paper _De West (The West)._ Shots were fired at other places as well, tells Louis Alfaisie, former deputyeditor of this newspaper. _De West_ called the acts of the military _mutiny_.

After the coup, its leader, Desi Bouterse, took control of the contacts with the press. News reports had to be presented to the Press Service of the _Nationale Militaire Raad_ (NMR) ( _National Military Council)_ before they could be published. Bouterse told journalists: 'For or against doesn't matter. Give the NMR a chance. We count on your support'. The task of the members of the NMR was to censor what newspapers intended to publish. Many journalists had to justify their reports about the new regime. Since newspapers were afraid to criticize the new regime, they started to print information provided by the regime without comments. _De Ware Tijd_ wrote on 7 November 1980: 1 Johan Adolf Pengel acted as Prime Minister from 1963 to 1969.

'It is clear that the ones in charge are testing the water. It is very unfortunate that they leave very little room for criticism but, in the end, this can be detrimental for them. One can grab power by force, but not forever. A re-appreciation is called for'. Directors and chief editors were summoned, intimidated, tortured, and in some cases even incarcerated by the military when they disagreed with their reporting. Self-censorship made its comeback in Surinam! Nita Ramcharan noted: 'The Surinam radio station _STVS_ was a mouthpiece for the military. In this new period of press censorship, all journalists were limited in the execution of their profession'. Nita Ramcharan is a journalist and widow of Leslie Rahman, one of the victims of the December murders. Many Surinamese citizens listened to Dutch media, since the Surinamese media were considered as unreliable. After a failed counter-coup, the military regime showed its true character.

Since then it became simply impossible for journalists to do their work properly. They had to undergo body checks before attending press conferences, and censorship was further sharpened. On 7 December 1982 the buildings of radio stations _Radika_ and _ABC_ were burned down, the printing press of _De Vrije Stem (The Free Voice)_ was bombed. Firefighters were prevented from putting the fire out.

December murders

During the night of 7 to 8 December 1982, sixteen opponents of the military regime were apprehended and taken to _Fort Zeelandia_. Five journalists: Jozef Slagveer (director of news agency _Informa)_ , André Kamperveen (founder and director of _Radio ABC_ ), Bram Behr (journalist of _Mokro_ ), Leslie Rahman (reporter of _De Ware Tijd_ and _Wrokoman Powa_ – paper of C-47) and Frank Wijngaarde ( _Radio ABC_ ) were tortured and murdered because they fought for freedom of expression. The same happened to ten other opponents of the regime.

The following day _STVS_ broadcasted a confession by Jozef Slagveer in which he tells about the coup. It could clearly be seen that he had been tortured. The media reported what the regime wanted: 'The perpetrators were shot while fleeing'. Murder was never mentioned during the military dictatorship. Instead of the 'December murders', the reference was the 'December events'. Bouterse accused the press of having infected the population with wrong information and opinions. Only _STVS, SRS_ and _De Ware Tijd_ were allowed to continue broadcasting and/or reporting, be it under strict censorship. All other media were banned. _Radio Nederland Wereldomroep_ ( _Dutch World Service_ ) became very popular; although the regime garbled their broadcasts.

The backlash of this period is still felt by the Surinamese media. More than 20 journalists fled the country, which was a great loss to journalism in Surinam. Towards the end of the military regime the situation was far from pleasant. All media firms were short of journalists, which obviously negatively impacted the quality of reporting. In 1986, Vereniging van Progressieve Mediawerkers VPM chairman Edward Naarendorp said: 'Despite the laudable personal dedication of colleagues – and how often this results in good reporting – the frequency with which the public is informed about rubbish, has reached an unacceptable low level'.

In July 1986, an armed conflict broke out between Ronnie Brunswijk and Desi Bouterse. Dutch journalists were not allowed to visit Surinam during the period of the conflict. Surinamese journalists were barred from visiting the jungle where Brunswijk's jungle commando resided. In short, objective reporting was not possible. Those who reported about this commando were accused of supporting Brunswijk.

Period after the military regime

In 1987 democracy was reinstated, and in 1992 a peace agreement was signed. Ronald Venetiaan won elections three times in a row. Once again the press attempted to inform the population properly. Two new newspapers appeared: _Dagblad Suriname (Surinam Daily)_ and _Times of Surinam._ Unfortunately, government people did not want to share information with the press; there was an atmosphere of intimidation and threat. Consequently, self-censorship was still a big problem.

In 1993, Armand Snijders moved from the Netherlands to Surinam to work as a journalist. He remembered: 'Obviously, I arrived in a period in which the dictatorship had just ended and democracy was recently restored. Those were the last days of the armed conflict and everybody was a bit afraid and thus careful, not only journalists, but the entire Surinamese population'.

Snijders remembers that he went to Surinam with an open, Dutch, perspective: 'I thought: what a mess, this world of journalism. But soon after I realized that it was a near miracle that newspapers appeared anyway. There were always problems: either it was an electricity blackout or no paper to print. Other than that, there were hardly any independent-minded journalists left to report; they all had left the country or had been murdered. All media were careful.' Advertisers stopped advertising when critical articles were published. In addition, newspapers did not receive the necessary foreign exchange from the government to buy writing paper.

Ramcharan explains that at the time it was thought that the government was responsible for arranging these matters: 'During the 1980s I worked for _De Ware Tijd_. At the time, we thought that it was normal that the government would help us buy foreign currencies against the official exchange rate. We needed foreign currencies to import paper. We could not get foreign currencies from the bank, and buying foreign currencies in the open market was too expensive. In the past the government always helped us in this matter; it always had been the case. It gave us a sense of independence'.

According to Snijders, in 1993 Bouterse still had a lot of power. When _STVS_ reported about a sensitive issue their news room was raided and burned down. Snijders remembers: 'I was in Surinam just three days and 'hit the jackpot', so to speak. A few people were wounded; this indicates how much tension there was, and this incident badly affected journalism'. _STVS_ is a state broadcasting company that reported critically about Bouterse during the Venetiaan administration. Snijders added that when the _STVS_ journalists were harassed, other journalists, who experienced a lot of harassment in the past, started to think twice before publishing critical articles.

Financially speaking, newspapers had fallen on hard times; there was no money for maintaining the printing presses and other hardware. After Desi Bouterse was ousted from his position as advisor to the government and withdrew his National Democratic Party (NDP) membership, a period of reasonable press freedom started.

The press commented strongly; but analyses of government's policy were lacking. In 1999, the press again began publishing opinion pieces in favour or critical of the government's policies. Statements were checked and the defenders of policies were given the opportunity to react to criticism. Readers were given the opportunity to ask questions and vent their opinions. Snijders left Surinam in 1996 and again in 2002 for Curaçao for treatment of injuries after having been intimidated and harassed. Even so, he decided to return to Surinam as he found it more challenging there, not only workwise, but also impactwise. Snijders felt that he could make a difference in Surinam.

In 2006, the monthly _Parbode Magazine_ appeared on the market, which to date is the only independent opinion paper in the country. A _Parbode_ staff member remembers that in the past the _Parbode_ building was broken into in connection with an investigation of Paramaribo's Turkish mafia. Computers and video cameras were stolen; four colleagues were intimidated by four thugs. Incidents like this one underscore that, despite improvements, threats still took place in 2006.

Snijders enjoyed writing for _Parbode,_ as his writings had an impact. In The Netherlands it would be very difficult to publish articles that people would talk about and, therefore would have an impact. The first issue of the _Parbode Magazine_ ran an article by Snijders about corrupt sons of politicians. It was then actually thought to be impossible to publish such an article. But it _was_ published. Snijders remembers that people were amazed when it appeared.

The present

According to Snijders it took a long time before journalists had again the heart to write – without fear – as they pleased. It is not yet perfect, adds Snijders, but there are critical journalists such as _De Ware Tijd's_ Ivan Cairo and Gerold Rozenblad. Also, Nita Ramcharan should be mentioned in this connection. She maintained her critical voice among the journalists. Ramcharan confirms that there is improvement in the situation and adds that the media is not any longer intrinsically dependent on the government. She notes that: 'In the past we were not yet in a position that, if the government would not cooperate, we would have alternative ways to report. Now, we make sure that we bring out our news all the time'.

Alfaisie commented that since the 1980s the mentality of the daily _De West_ hasn't changed: 'Of course we were intimidated by the events at the time. But you adjust your strategies and philosophy. As regards our opinion about democracy and freedom, this has not changed'. _De West_ is plagued by various problems, yet it attempts to keep up the true essence of journalism. A 1980s large photo of a damaged bill board of the newspaper is hanging in the newsroom to remind the journalists what they are fighting for, and that a long march has already been completed. Also Ivan Cairo also sees improvements in the situation: 'It is my impression that the press has become more critical and that the citizens vent their opinions more freely than in the past. I find this a very positive development'.

Despite these positive developments, there are quite a few journalists who find that journalism in Surinam still has a long way to go. In terms of fully informing the population properly, Snijders observed: 'The citizens still don't receive complete and transparent information. No, this is definitely not the case.'

December murders

As mentioned above President Bouterse has a shady past as regards press freedom. On 8 December 1982 fifteen opponents of the regime, among them five journalists, were shot. To this day, this event has had a large impact on Surinam's journalism. A comment by a journalist: 'The December murders have gotten under all our skin'. In everyday life this means that there is no reporting on certain sensitive events and issues. Another anonymous source confirms: 'If a reporter would ask Bouterse a critical question during a press conference, it would probably have nasty consequences for the reporter concerned. It simply wouldn't be done; reporters are very careful'.

The generation of journalists who lived through this dark episode of Surinam's history, views this period differently than those who were born later. But even this younger generation is careful: 'We heard and read about it. The fear does not subside just like that', this is what Soelami Kemble- Starke, coanchor of the _Jeugdjournaal (Youth Journal)_ told me. There is not yet mature journalism in Surinam. Surinam expert, Diederik Samwel observed that fear and carefulness trigger self-censorship; Ramcharan also recognizes this in the attitude of journalists: 'Fear stifles reporters in their writing. However, I don't experience that limitation'. Yet, other journalists confirm that they apply self-censorship. Although the December murders had a negative effect on journalism, the event also had a positive effect: it 'groomed' a generation of fully motivated journalists. Ramcharan is such a journalist. As mentioned earlier, her fiancé, Leslie Rahman, was one of the victims of the December murders.

Ramcharan: 'The fact that Leslie was killed for his defense of the free word is the very reason why I choose to be a journalist myself. So, I continue his work. I want to demonstrate that killing someone doesn't make any sense, because others will rise to continue the principles of the person killed'.

In 2007, a court case began about the December murders. Desi Bouterse was the top defendant. In 2010, despite this pending case, Bouterse was elected President of the republic. In 2012 the Assemblee (National Assembly) approved an Amnesty Law which grants immunity to the President of the republic for his possible involvement in the December murders. Since the adoption of this law, the survivors and widows of the persons killed have undertaken all kinds of actions to get the accused prosecuted after all. In June 2016, the Amnesty Law was declared illegal by the Military Tribunal. The President of the Military Tribunal is of the opinion that this law would be blocking the ongoing court case. The Amnesty Law should have been corroborated by a Constitutional Court. However, such a court does not exist in Surinam and its establishment is not likely in the foreseeable future. Hence, the Tribunal's president decided that the preparatory work regarding the court case should be resumed and the accused party, Desi Bouterse, should be tried. This was planned to happen on 30 June 2016, but was suspended.

President Bouterse undertook all kinds of actions to block the resumption of the case. An example: on 18 June 2016 various media organizations received an e-mail containing a communiqué from the _Commission Desi Bouterse_. Its contents is as follows: We, the _Commission Desi Bouterse_ (CDB), the past few days have looked at and analyzed reports for and against the Judiciary; We also have analyzed the _Trias Politica_ (i.e., the Separation of Powers) principles and now arrive at the following conclusion:

1 The separation between the Judiciary, the Executive and the Legislature is becoming somewhat blurred;

2 The Judiciary is involving itself in matters pertaining to the Legislature;

3 The public opinion which at the moment is quite divided about points 1 and 2 above,

Arrive at the conclusion that, given the above, it would be a sign of wisdom to leave the path leading to confrontation, and – instead – respect the articles as mentioned in the Constitution, in name and spirit, as well as to take into consideration the sentiments of a large part of the population, including the ones who voted for the _NDP_. We, the Commission Desi Bouterse **,** are of the opinion that, in the end, it is in the interest of Surinam and of the Surinamese population to maintain calm in the society, so that the country can be lifted to ever higher levels. All other matters would keep us from achieving the set objective, i.e., _to develop Surinam into a Paradise_.

The _Commission Desi Bouterse._

In addition, on 21 June 2016, President Bouterse made alarming statements about the 'constitutional crisis': There are forces in the society which are bent on creating chaos. We observe what is happening in the media. We see what kind of reports are printed and aired: 'The government imported tear gas', 'The government imported rubber bullets', 'The government... you name it'. All attempts to create disorder in the society will be dealt with in a tactical manner. We will take away all oxygen to put out the fire that opponents want to kindle. This attack is not a simple one. It will depend on all of us to undo the disturbance to order for the nation's sake.

With this statement, Bouterse in fact confirms his opinion that the Military Tribunal had overstepped its mandate by declaring that the amnesty law does not apply as regards the December murders case. In addition, the Surinamese opposition parties thought that President Bouterse wanted to move towards martial law. This sense arose after the parties had met with the President, were left with the impression that the President wanted to embark on an 'ominous path'. Ivan Brave said the following during an interview with the _Netherlands Broadcasting Foundation (NOS)_ : 'Bouterse and his people apply all kinds of means to keep him in his position as President. They all apply all kinds of measures that the law allows, be it that they stretch the law to the maximum, in order to protect him'.

On 30 June 2016, the Military Tribunal suspended the case against President Bouterse and other suspects of the December murders. Bouterse himself blocked this case by referring to an article in the Constitution, one that had never been applied before. This Article 148 says that the President may, in specific cases, issue orders to the Attorney General to suspend cases that may endanger the security of the state.

The Military Tribunal decided on 30 January 2017 that the pending case can proceed and announced that the charges against Bouterse will be announced on 9 February 2017. However, on that date, the Military Tribunal decided to postpone the case once again. This decision was made on the basis of an appeal by the prosecutor. At the time this booklet was written, a new date had not yet been announced by the Military Tribunal. Soelami Kemble-Starke commented: 'Since the December murders case has not yet been concluded, it is difficult for journalists not to think about it'. The fact that the case was again suspended means that the memory of the December murders continues to live on in the minds of journalists and continues to trigger fear and carefulness that results in self-censorship.

Jaap Hoogendam: 'The Court does not dare to charge politicians. Somebody high-up should not be attacked. This is part of the Surinamese culture'.

When newsmagazine _Parbode Post_ was closed down by _De Ware Tijd (The True Time),_ in 2005, Jaap Hoogendam took the initiative to start a new magazine. The first issue of _Parbode Magazine_ came out in May 2006. _Parbode_ exists for more than 10 years and is appreciated for its critical and vocal stance. The journalists try to hold a mirror in front of the society through their critical articles. This implies that P _arbode_ is regularly taken to court for cases in which the paper is charged with defamation, slander, or damaging reputations. Other than that, the recruitment of good journalists is not an easy job; journalists often work for other employers as well, such as _Lanti,_ and for enterprises, which affects their independence.

# Chapter 2 Legal Framework

On 31 May 1865 press freedom was introduced for the first time in Surinam's Constitution. Article 8 of chapter 1 describes the regulations regarding the freedom of the press as follows: Nobody requires ex ante approval to express thoughts and sentiments via the printing press. The responsibility of authors, publishers, printers, and distributors and the protector of the interest in the public order and morality against the abuse of the liberty of the press are established by colonial regulation. Rules through which the publication of printed material would be obstructed, require confirmation by law.

During the military rule in the 1980s a lot changed for the press. In August 1980, the Assemblee and the Constitution were suspended. According to the military rulers there was no censorship; yet, critical journalists had a difficult time getting their articles published as written. After the dissolution of the Constitution, decrees were issued. Article 8 of Decree A-11 recognized press freedom. Unfortunately, it was not applied in practice. Many journalists were harassed and intimidated. Various newspapers and broadcasters were banned.

On 30 April 1984, a new press code was issued, which was a step in the right direction. Despite the limitations in the area of free expression, a first move into the direction of the return to democracy was made. Newspapers and broadcasters that agreed to accept this new press code were allowed to publish and broadcast again, such as _De West, Radio Apintie_ and _Rapar._ On 25 November 1985, Desi Bouterse, together with the three largest political parties before the coup:De Nationale Partij Suriname (NPS), De Vooruitstrevende Hervormings Partij (VHP) and De Progressieve Surinaamse Volkspartij (PSV) agreed that democracy had to return in Surinam. It was decided that within 27 months democratic elections would be held and that a new Constitution had to be drafted. In October 1987 a new Constitution was adopted by referendum. However, the influence of the armed forces was still felt. Also, the above-mentioned press code remained in force.

A peace treaty was signed in 1992, and a year later, President Ronald Venetiaan managed to end the military's control over the civil government. In addition he sacked Desi Bouterse. Venetiaan was able to do so by adjusting a few articles in the 1987 Constitution. This constitution was not fully appreciated by many. Freedom of the press is still enshrined in Surinam's constitution. Article 19 of chapter 5 entitled Basic rights, personal rights and liberties, states the following: Every person has the right to express his thoughts or feelings and to express his opinion through the printing press or other means of communication, taking into consideration everybody's responsibilities according to the law.

However, Surinam does not have a law for the Disclosure of Public Documents (DPD), which would allow access to government documents. Such a law is a crucial prerequisite for a democracy and an indispensable instrument for reporting, as journalists would be able to analyze what politicians' interests are, for example, in decisions regarding large infrastructural works or in political deals. Thomas Bruning observed: 'There are more than one possibilities to expose corruption in a country, the way in which business deals are concluded, and the manner in which a country's government functions, to the population. These possibilities promote the creation of a balance between the role of the government on the one hand and the role of journalism on the other, and – as a result – the relations between the two become more stable'.

The chairman of the _Surinamese Association of Journalists_ , Wilfred Leeuwin, agrees with Bruning's observation: 'We don't have a DPD in Surinam. This really is a prerequisite for journalists to enable them to do their job'.

Surinamese journalists request more government transparency. According to them, the fact that there is no DPD negatively impinges on journalistic freedom. Armand Snijders: 'It is very difficult to get information. Every democracy should have a DPD, but not so in Surinam; here you walk into a blind alley. That is why it is so difficult to extract information'.

Ivan Cairo, also, emphasizes the importance of a having a DPD law: 'All professional journalists are limited by not being supported by such a DPD. The government doesn't feel obliged to provide information to journalists when requested. A DPD would certainly greatly improve the professional working conditions for journalists in Surinam'. Louis Alfaisie, former _De West's_ deputy-chief editor, confirms that many journalists have asked the government to enact a DPD. Now, they expend a lot of time digging up information they need to do credible reporting. He cites the example of the killing of two robbers and the hospitalization of five people, among them two policemen. Rumors had it that Desi Bouterse's stepson, Romano Meriba, would have been involved in the shootout in Paramaribo North, which took place in November 2015. It took journalists of _De West_ six full days to collect information about the incident to find out what really had happened. The information discovered contrasted quite considerably with the information provided by the police.

Alfaisie added that _De West_ was lucky to have journalists on the spot when the shootout took place, so that the paper was not dependent on information provided by the police. Nonetheless, sometimes independent reporting does not trigger the hoped for effect. 'When a newspaper writes something which is different from what the government says citizens typically believe that the newspaper is writing nonsense', laments Alfaisie. This is caused by the fact that some media act as the government's mouthpiece, and, journalists are not trusted by the people. Critical newspapers are often considered as pulp papers and/or their journalists liars, according to Alfaisie. Nitra Ramcharan confesses that it is not always easy to be a reporter, in particular because information is often hard to come by; journalists are often prevented access to information sources. She adds that since there is no DPD, you simply can't force people to give you the information required. She cites the example of the bauxite sector. Alcoa's daughter company Suralco, which produced bauxite in Surinam for 99 years announced that it would end production.

Ramcharan commented: 'I find it a great pity that the government and the Assemblee discuss this vital issue for Surinam behind closed doors. And what I don't understand at all is that the Assemblee is supposed to defend openness and transparency. All the people of Surinam want to know what is going to happen after such a long time of Suralco's presence'.

It is also clear that journalists are skeptical about the possible influence of a DPD. Alfaisie argues that DPD is not a magic formula. Not everything will change all of a sudden. True, DPD is an instrument, a tool, but journalists should then also make use of that instrument, and that would be quite a different story. He added that whistle-blowers would need protection. It should not happen that people sharing government information with journalists disappear. Snijders is worried about the lack of speed with which the Judiciary functions. Even if there would be a DPD in Surinam, it would not make a big difference. He elaborated his thinking as follows: 'Should we refer a newsrelated case to the courts, it would take at least nine months before the issue would be tabled. By that time, the issue has become old news'.

Ramcharan agreed with Snijders' observations: 'Many Assemblee members write letters to the government requesting information, but never receive a reply. Should a DPD law be adopted by the Assemblee, it would be wise to include a _deadline_ within which the requested information should be provided. When the deadline passes, a penalty should be paid. Only then, will a DPD function'. _Parbode Magazine's_ publisher, Jaap Hoogendam, is a bit more optimistic; yet he feels that a DPD will only bear results in five to fifteen years. He agrees that a DPD will facilitate reporting but it will take time before the benefits of the DPD will sink in.

Court cases

Various journalists have been victimized by censorship. Their articles have been banned based on shaky legal grounds, such as citing laws that do not apply. As a result, a climate of fear and self-censorship was created. According to the victims, the legal grounds on which they were charged were at best not accurately formulated, thereby opening the possibility of ending up with a wrong or baseless interpretation. Journalists confirmed that they have been charged with obscenity, blasphemy and violating confidentiality, without any legal base. In addition, journalists would also need the government's guarantee that their sources of information would be protected. One anonymous source told me that journalists run the risk of being charged for publishing articles that could be considered offensive to senior government officials.

Various media organizations toe the line of the government out of fear. Media that take a critical stance vis-à-vis the government run the risk of being charged. The government's attitude is not very conducive to improving the situation, according to Armand Snijders. Alfaisie confirms that the government brings a lot of court cases against the media to court. The government seems to be setting a trend that is threatening to become a part of the political culture in Surinam. Apart from the valuable time and money involved, this trend sets the development of journalism back. In particular, junior journalists will be intimidated by it even if there is no immediate threat, observed Alfaisie. He recounted the story of a case against his newspaper brought to court by a minister, whose name cannot be disclosed, about information in an article that was run by other newspapers as well. Alfaisie's paper was the only one charged, although it did not have the 'scoop'. He concluded that the government was trying to harass them. This is not the way to fight journalists. Yet, it has been common practice in Surinam for some time.

From time to time, institutions try – through court cases – to prevent the media from reporting about issues in the future. One example concerns _De West_ which was taken to court by the chairman of the Foreign Exchange Commission, based on a column _De West_ published. The commission won the case. What this chairman tried to achieve by this action was to prevent _De West_ would from publishing articles about the Foreign Exchange Commission, concluded Alfaisie.

The _Parbode Magazine_ was confronted with a lot of cases towards the end of 2013. The magazine lost two of them on unclear grounds. Other cases are still pending. This takes a lot of time of the journalists involved; worse, it affects the good name of media organizations and journalists. Pieter van Maele, a correspondent, argued that any journalist will think twice before writing a critical article or column.

One example of a court case against the _Parbode Magazine_ involved an interview with _NDP_ politician Noreen Cheung. In the interview she mentioned that she still had doubts about the Amnesty Law. She was quoted as having said: 'I still am not sure what to think about it'. Van Maele who had conducted the interview received a phone call from her. She was clearly furious and scolded him for quoting her. For a time nothing happened, but soon after Cheung demanded a rectification. It appeared that Cheung had taped the interview on her mobile phone, but she apparently had deleted parts of it as the total interview lasted one hour and ten minutes, while Cheung's taped version lasted only 45 minutes. This is clearly a case of falsifying evidence which, according to the law, could mean a five-year jail sentence. It turned out that Cheung did not appear on the electoral list of the _NDP_ , and was, therefore, looking for a scapegoat, and that was the _Parbode_ , according to van Maele. Cheung had also accused the _Parbode_ of publishing a photo of her without her consent. Van Maele concluded that if he had known the outcome of the interview he would never have done it. The reaction of former chief-editor Snijders was strong: 'Your serious and insulting accusations are unworthy of a member of parliament, they are completely unjustified and lack any ground and, in addition, they constitute a form of defamation of character of the journalist who conducted the interview'.

Van Maele is now more worried about journalism than about the court case. This case was about the rectification issue. He commented: 'Should I be convicted, however, in this ridiculous case I wonder what kind of journalism I can practice in the future. If I will only be able to write about people who have to approve what I write, it will be the end of independent reporting'. _Parbode_ has also been sued by former minister Abrahams. The magazine published an article about corrupt practices in which minister Abrahams was allegedly involved, according to anonymous sources. 'I am worried about the negative influence of these cases on media organizations', said van Maele. The case has been pending for three years. The magazine believes that it will lose the case. Snijders explains that the Judiciary is influenced by the Executive: 'When you are unlucky and you face the 'wrong' judge, you might as well forget winning the case'.

Should _Parbode_ lose this case, which they fear will happen because some judges are influenced by the Executive, _Parbode_ would have to pay a lot of money in indemnities. Then no one knows what will happen. 'It is a matter of trial and error to learn how far you can go', says Snijders. The time that _Parbode_ was confronted by a series of bailiffs was a coincidence, according to him. 'This may also have been influenced by the fact that the Surinam society was not accustomed to critical journalism' concludes Snijders.

Hoogendam believes that the problem with the Judiciary is a deeper one: 'The Judiciary doesn't dare to convict politicians. This is because judges are appointed by the government'. That is why the Judiciary occupies itself with petty crimes, instead of going after corrupt members of the elite. There were a lot of indications that Abrahams was corrupt. Hoogendam argues: 'In the Netherlands the prosecutor would immediately take action once an article such as the one on Abrahams was published. In Surinam this does not happen. This is deplorable: the 'big fish' make millions of dollars with corrupt practices. This is bad for the country'.

This was not the first time Cheung was clashing with the _Parbode_. The first time she decided not to take legal action. The interview van Maele had with her was done on her request, because, as she noted: 'the _Parbode_ had to make amends.'

The _Parbode_ appealed a case concerning an article about the murder of Henry van Ommeren, a member of the Surinamese elite. The article was based on 43 sources, but so far _Parbode_ has not won the case. The reason, some say is that someone in a prominent position in society should not be attacked in print as was done in the _Parbode_ article. Surinam is still an old-fashioned society: one is not supposed to damage the reputation of high-ranking personalities. This may well be a remnant of the colonial heritage. Snijders recognizes this aspect: 'most court cases concern publications about the elite'.

Hoogendam obviously does not like _Parbode's_ involvement in court cases but is nevertheless confident of winning them. The magazine has not had a lawyer for quite some time; Hoogendam does the defense himself. The cases are predominantly about defamation, and damage to reputations, which take more of Hoogendam's time than _Parbode's_ money. He admits that in a few cases articles were not accurately worded, so the journalists are instructed to fine-tune their texts. In some cases articles had to be corrected with a few well-chosen words to underscore the respect for the people about whom the articles were written. Accusations have to be substantiated with facts and the accused should have the opportunity to present their views. Hoogendam instructs journalists that in case of doubt they consult him or a lawyer.

Iwan Brave, chief-editor of _De Ware Tijd_ confirms that he is regularly confronted by angry people who demand a retraction. He notes, however, that from time to time a demand is justified given the poor reporting. He says: 'Sometimes I defend the article knowing that my journalists were wrong. And then I think: 'For heaven's sake, how is this possible'. It surprises him somewhat that there are no more cases. 'It is my opinion that people should go to court rather than intimidate journalists'.

Cairo was taken to court after the publication of an article about a businessman who had demanded indemnities from Assemblee member Mahinder Jogi. In return, the parliamentarian took the businessman to court, who – in the end – had to pay indemnities to the parliamentarian. The judge then instructed Cairo to publish an apology to the convicted businessman because if the article had not been published, Jogi would not have taken the businessman to court. This case did not stop Cairo from writing comparable articles. He is not prepared to let himself be intimidated. Cairo added: 'Court cases form an integral risk of our job; not everybody will appreciate what you write.'

The proper functioning of the press is also dependent on the level of economic independence and political freedom; and it is dependent on how journalists organize their own independence. This cannot always be guaranteed by law; the role played by the association of journalists is very important in this respect.

In May 1993, Armand Snijders moved to Paramaribo. Since then he distinguished himself as a committed and critical journalist in the Surinamese media environment. Towards the end of the dictatorship and civil war, his critical reporting was not always appreciated; he was regularly harassed. Having had a pistol against his head and a broken collarbone, did not deter him from writing critical articles. In 1996 and 2002 he left Surinam for Curaçao, for one year each, but in both cases he decided to return to Paramaribo. He felt that his work in Surinam would have more impact, which for him is the most important drive.

Armand Snijders: _'_ I established a name by being a critical journalist. When I started at _Parbode_ , I scared people by what I dared to write'.

# Chapter 3 Political freedom

In many cases press freedom is enshrined in a Constitution, but in practice this freedom is not ensured: journalists are being harassed, prosecuted, intimidated, or even worse. Enacting press freedom is one thing, but allowing journalists to do their job is another matter. In Surinam's history press freedom has almost always been enshrined in Surinamese Codes and Constitutions and/or in Decrees. This does not necessarily mean that what was written in law was applied in practice. Surinam's history shows that despite enacted press freedom, it was often violated. This was the case in the past, and – unfortunately – it still is true today. It must be said though that currently press freedom is enjoyed reasonably well; still, the government exerts its influence on the media and the press acts accordingly.

The government is actively promoting itself in the public domain and does so with the help of journalists they hired away from the media. These journalists now produce radio and television programs in which the government is always portrayed favourably. Other measures taken by the government include the introduction of press silences, and journalists with a critical attitude towards the government are barred from press conferences and/or are otherwise boycotted. Now and again, journalists are being snubbed, and sometimes broadcasts are forbidden.

Indexes

_Reporters without Borders_ and _Freedom House_ rank Surinam reasonably well. In _Reporters without Border's_ 2016 ranking Surinam came in at 22 (partly free) and in the _Freedom House_ list Surinam scored77 (free) out of a maximum score of 100. However, Surinam's score on _Freedom House's_ 2014 list dropped four places; the largest drop in the region. _Freedom House's_ explanation for this drop was that the country did not apply the guarantees spelled out in the Constitution and in the laws protecting press freedom. In addition, _Freedom House_ noted the increased usage of laws pertaining to defamation and the preferential distribution of government advertisements. _Free Press Unlimited_ director, Leon Willems, recognizes this: 'In an increasing number of countries journalists are being taken to court for defamation. This happens when journalists criticize the President or when they write critically about sensitive subjects. But these are not the only examples. The business community is also sensitive to critical reporting'.

In summarizing, there may be press freedom by law, but at the same time there are defamation laws. _Free Press Unlimited_ (FPU) implements projects whose purpose it is to inform the citizenry. Surinam is doing better in the realm of press freedom, according to FPU, but there is still a lot of improvement to be made. Willems: 'It is important to broaden the media landscape in its diversity by, for example, giving a voice to children and by promoting more involvement of women in the media'.

According to Wilfred Leeuwin, journalist and chairman of the _Surinamese Association of Journalists (SvJ),_ the problem is not so much press freedom but rather the poor quality of journalism in Surinam: 'Since the 1980s, Surinam has had a bad reputation in terms of press freedom. However, the situation is improving'. When jounalists perform their task well, everything will be fine. Pieter van Maele, correspondent and journalist in Surinam, does not agree with Leeuwin's opinion. Surinam scores reasonably well in press freedom, but this is because there is a kind of censorship which is not accounted for in these rankings. This censorship preempts subsequent writings. Journalist and Surinam expert, Diederik Samwel, agrees with van Maele. He argues: 'The situation is much more nuanced in Surinam. The press is applying a wait-and-see attitude'.

Many journalists confirm that they don't experience complete press freedom in their day-to-day work in Surinam. This is caused by political influence, self-censorship, corruption, and by the fact that Surinam is a small society.

Propaganda

The Bouterse administration is dealing with the media in a special way. Officially, the press is free. However, in practice the government is applying various methods to control information. One of the methods is propaganda. Given the fact that journalists' attitude is one of restraint, propaganda can easily overtake what journalists write. They rather write articles in which different aspects are being highlighted than writing a critical analysis. This is because they have to take various viewpoints into consideration in their writing, including their own interest and safety, which play a prominent part. After Bouterse's election as President of the republic, the government hired away around seventeen journalists from media organizations. Leeuwin commented as follows: 'It is remarkable that so many journalists have changed sides since Bouterse was re-elected as President: these journalists moved from the newsroom to the state office'.

Samwel writes, in various articles, that the government, thanks to this 'poaching', is less bothered by critical journalists. In addition, the government can now better provide the media with information. Twenty five percent of the journalists interviewed confirm that this is their impression as well. They also said that the government is actively producing and distributing propaganda, which is being written by the journalists who joined the government and thus write what they are instructed to write. The higher government salaries are attractive for journalists; the downside is that they are detrimental to objective reporting. An anonymous source commented that there is a shortage of principled, independent reporters. Journalists are easily seduced by better pay and they sell half-truths. They act as the master's voice.

Radio programs like Cliff Limburg's _Bakana tori_ ( _Behind the News_ ) are progovernment. Limburg, whose nickname is Limbo, used to be one of the best journalists in the country. He possesses a critical mind. For example, during the Venetiaan administration he had a radio show criticizing the Judiciary; however, Limbo is now the spokesperson for Desi Bouterse. _Bakana tori p_ romotes the good work of Bouterse's government while criticizing Dutch politicians. Nita Ramcharan observed that quite a few journalists were already _NDP_ supporters. The public has been fooled by colleagues who stealthily promoted _NDP_ politics.

Samwel notes that the government is also spreading information via the state broadcasters _SRS_ (radio) and _STVS_ ( television). Various anonymous journalists argue that often this type of information is disguised as journalism, while, in fact, it is propaganda. This makes it hard for listeners and viewers to distinguish between the two. Moreover, the overdose of propaganda about the government's actions, makes it harder for critical reports (which are often dismissed as unjustified criticism) to be noticed. Ramcharan explains that many people love the President and the members of the _NDP_ which makes them unsympathetic to less favourable reports.

Low quality education does not help knowing how to appreciate good or bad journalism or how to distinguish between the two – or to determine what is propaganda and what is independent information. The large volume of propaganda also hinders in making the distinction, let alone discovering and appreciating critical pieces of information, according to an anonymous source. Also, Armand Snijders emphasizes the detrimental effect of propaganda, especially propaganda aired via radio and television: 'From time to time I am shocked by what I see on TV. We have complained about it for years, but nothing changes'.

President Bouterse's press conferences are broadcast live. Reporters are allowed to ask questions, but when there are many questions, and the President cannot deal with all of them, the overflow will then be answered by cabinet ministers. In the past there were weekly ministerial press conferences. In 2012, however, they were suspended when ministers became unwilling to answer sensitive questions, even though these questions were inspired by democratic principles. From time to time press silences are established during periods when the government is negotiating with different political parties.

Elections

Louis Alfaisie observes that there is a wide difference in the way journalism is being practiced before and after elections: 'Politicians before an election are in a 'propaganda mode'. After the elections they withdraw into their ivory tower. From then on, it is impossible to extract comments from ministers'. Ivan Cairo confirms that politicians – and that applies to coalition and opposition politicians – are much more accessible before rather than after elections: 'They use us before the election to get their message across to the electorate'. Snijders notes that a lot of media organizations did not take a critical stance vis-à-vis Bouterse in the run up to the May 2015 elections: 'There was no analysis of what he has achieved and what his failures were; it simply did not happen'.

Ramcharan also confirms the big difference before and after elections: 'There was the impression that Surinam was doing fine, but after the elections it appeared that there was no money, and that the country is not doing well at all. People were being fooled'. Snijders added that this explains Bouterse's success. His government is successful in fooling the population. He can tell the people lies and nonsense. Just before the elections the rumour was that the government's coffers were empty. Snijders admitted: 'Then Bouterse gives a press conference in which he, very ably, tells a story so that even I, being very suspicious of what Bouterse says, am put at ease. It is impressive how he does it; he is a demagogue'.

Censorship

Despite the fact that Surinam's history is littered with active censorship, the situation has improved. A small group of journalists confirms that they don't feel inhibited by ongoing censorship. On the other hand, a larger group of journalists admits that from to time they feel constrained by censorship. This observation proves that censorship continues to play a role in contemporary Surinam.

Quite a few interviewed journalists confirm that President Bouterse's image in terms of press freedom is not good. During his Presidency in the 1980s, journalists were killed, media organizations were closed and sensors were installed in newsrooms. This is no longer the case, says Leeuwin. He adds: 'Because of Bouterse's past quite a few happenings are now magnified. But is this bad? I don't think so. It does mean, however, that he is being watched'.

There is not much difference in how censorship was applied and is being applied between the Bouterse and Venetiaan administrations. The difference lies in their communication skills. Venetiaan was a poor communicator while Bouterse is a great communicator. Bouterse cultivates his public image. He knows the importance of his image and how to enhance his TV appearances. An anonymous source says that this is how Bouterse builds and maintains his political popularity and will continue to exert his influence on the media to preserve his popular image.

Almost half of the journalists interviewed experienced a ban on their broadcasts or publications. One example: The deputy-editor of _The Times of Surinam_ was once visited by Melvin Linscheer, the government's chief of security. Linscheer told the deputy-editor to stop publishing critical articles. Leeuwin remembers that TV program _Suriname Vandaag_ ( _Surinam Today_ ) was also a victim of censorship. The contents of the program had to be adjusted as instructed by the government, thereby preventing viewers from watching the original program.

Yet another example concerns a _Surinaams Jeugdjournaal_ ( _Youth Journal)_ program about the remembrance of the December murders that was scheduled to be broadcast on 9 December 2013. When presenter Soelami Kemble-Starke announced the item, the screen went blank. Chief-editor of the program, Hennah Draaibaar told me that she immediately requested a clarification from _STVS'_ s director, Mrs. Lackin. After all, as a representative of the free media, one should never accept censorship, as this violates the right of free expression as well as the right that children have to receive independent information, according to Draaibaar. _STVS_ told her that a mistake was made, that it was not an act of censorship, and that the item had not been 'scanned' before the broadcast. The item concerned was aired the next day. The _SvJ_ says that this confirms that there was no censorship because the program was broadcast. Leeuwin has a slightly different interpretation: 'The program was initially not broadcast because it was not clear what its contents were. Every medium has a screening unit'.

The _Nederlandse Vereniging van Journalisten_ ( _NvJ_ ) ( _Netherlands Association of Journalists_ ) argues that prior approval of the broadcasting of a particular program is not required. Screening is the responsibility of an independent editorial board. _NvJ'_ s Secretary Thomas Bruning's opinion is that only a journalist can judge whether a program should be aired or not. So the final responsibility is the journalist's. Besides, the _Jeugdjournaal_ is autonomous in deciding what to broadcast; it does not need approval from other authorities. As already noted, the item was broadcast after all, together with items about press freedom. Kemble-Starke: 'Children are entitled to know what happened'.

According to Kemble-Starke this issue demonstrates that censorship and intimidation are applied to subjects that are politically sensitive. Generally speaking, the _Jeugdjournaal_ is not bothered by the authorities. When a particular subject is complex, it will be presented in a manner that children can understand. Censorship is applied depending on target group and subject. The problem with the remembrance broadcast would suggest that the government did not want children to learn about the December murders. Snijders explains that Bouterse's spokesperson, Limburg, has a lot of influence on what _STVS_ broadcasts. According to Snijders, the editors of _STVS_ are appointed by the government. Snijders adds that when Venetiaan became President, he also put editors of his choice in charge. At the time there was thus also political influence at _STVS._ An anonymous _STVS_ journalist provided the following examples of censorship. He presented a program on which the President was a guest. The President became irritated about a particular issue. After the program was taped, the cameraman was told that the program should not be broadcast, whereupon the journalist said that the decision was his and that the program would be aired. A bit later, a phone call was received with the message that the tape was to be delivered to a government official. Meanwhile, however, another medium reported the incident, after which the tape was quickly returned, albeit with missing bits and pieces of what the program had been.

Influence of media directors

It is not only the government that applies censorship, directors of media organiztions do so as well from time to time. Ramcharan started her own firm _Starnieuws_ after having experienced in-house censorship when she worked at _De Ware Tijd, Times of Surinam,_ and _Suriname Vandaag_ , ( _Surinam Today_ ), an _STVS_ program. She said that the most important reason for her resignations was that she had too little editorial space to write what she wanted to, and not be limited by the interests of the owner of the companies concerned: 'In the end owners want to have a finger in the pie and decide what the contents should be. This was unacceptable to me'.

Seshma Bissesar, a journalist, agrees. She observed that Surinam is a mess because there is no critical reporting: 'Even if a journalist wants to write a critical piece about a particular subject, he or she should take into account the opinion of the media director'. A _STVS_ journalist tells us that some pieces are rewritten by the chiefeditor, who is directed by the President's Cabinet office. He said: 'My piece was rewritten five times. I then told the editor that it was no longer my article, and that they should do with it what they deemed fit. The editor is there always, therefore you never know whether what you have written will be published in the way you intended it'.

Intimidation

The Surinamese government influences the contents of information in a subtle manner. Although roughly half of the journalists interviewed have never been intimidated, there are yet quite a few who were. The intimidation often happens after the publication of a critical article or broadcast. The author concerned receives a phone call or a visit in the newsroom and is told not to publish or broadcast this type of information again. Alfaisie often received phone calls after having published critical articles in _De West._ He also tells us about sources that initially provided information but later wanted to take back what they had given. He believes that the withdrawal requests were inspired by fear and pressure exerted on them by the government. One example: once _De West_ intended to publish an article about an association of contractors that was not paid Surinam Dollars (SRD) 1 million by the government for infrastructural works.

Before the article was published, the chairman of the association called, urging _De West_ not to publish the article, apparently fearing that, should the article be published, the association likely would have to wait even longer before being paid. _Parbode Magazine_ received a request from the _NDP_ not to publish an interview with a former party member. _NDP_ sent a representative to the _Parbode_ making attractive offers in exchange for not publishing the interview. Snijders remembers: 'The colleague who had interviewed the former _NDP_ person and I could have taken a few years sabbatical living on the amount offered us. In addition, plots were offered to our children to build houses. Nevertheless we published the interview'.

This is not all. _De West's_ building was once burned down in the hope that evidence would be destroyed. The fire was put out in time by the chief-editor himself. The suspect was a military service man who was never convicted. _FPU_ director, Leon Willems observes: 'In countries such as Surinam, journalists encounter much pressure not to write in a critical fashion about the powers that be. An environment of poor political liberties causes many journalists to give up their profession. This is because they are frustrated in doing their work, but also because there are no career perspectives. Their families are put under pressure or are being silenced. There is little international political will to improve the situation. All this results in journalists either applying self-censorship or giving up journalism altogether'.

The above-mentioned security chief of the Surinamese government, Linscheer, intimidated a chief-editor so much that he resigned. The intimidations started with warnings about publishing critical articles, but later increased with threats to his family. This is what _Findley_ , the affected publisher of _De West_ told us: 'Some publishers noted that the government punished publications it did not like. The punishment would include stopping advertising, ending subscriptions by ministries, no longer sending press releases to journalists, and not inviting journalists to press conferences'. Mr. Pierkhan of _Dagblad Suriname (Surinam Daily)_ added: 'If you don't want to be blackmailed, then you have to be prepared to survive without government support'.

_Surinam Daily_ reported about the high salaries of staff members of the president's Cabinet Office. One phone call by the chief of Cabinet sufficed to have a rectification published. Samwel wrote an article about a march to protest to the Amnesty Law. In the wake of which _The Times of Surinam_ received death threats.

In general the situation in Surinam is not one of brutal suppression; instead subtle pressure is applied. For instance, Vice President Robert Ameerali regularly institutes press silences when negotiations are ongoing between the government and the unions. Alfaisie explains that at times _De West_ journalists are not invited for press conferences and other official events, which means that they can only report through intermediate sources: 'Sometimes the authorities clearly indicate that we are not welcome, while in other instances they pretend that a misunderstanding occurred. This happens now and again; it is evolving into a culture by which the government maintains its power. During Bouterse-1, we were not allowed inside the press centre of the Cabinet Office for a long time. This also happened during Venetiaan's presidency'. _Parbode Magazine_ seldom receives invitations. Snijders says: 'When we go anyway, we are thrown out'. Their reporters often hear about certain events only after they have taken place: 'We don't care, because we would have been obliged to report in a positive way, like other media do, even without having been asked'.

Many journalists confirm that it is indeed difficult to interview persons who can provide information or who have access to certain documents. One journalist commented: 'There is still a culture that one only talks to journalists who write favourably about the government. Critical journalists are shunned'. Van Maele believes the attitude depends on the political colour of the newspapers. President Venetiaan regularly talked to a group of journalists who now are shunned by the authorities.

In May 2015, _Parbode Magazine_ organized a debate in which the _NDP_ , Bouterse's party, did not participate. The reason for their non-participation was that the _NDP_ had understood that the debate would be broadcast by _ABC Radio_ , which had refused to broadcast NDP commercials. It turned out that the _NDP_ never had asked _ABC Radio_ to broadcast their commercials. The reason for not participating in the debate was probably the fact that _ABC Radio_ was owned by André Kamperveen, who was one of the victims of the December murders. True, _Radio ABC_ did not broadcast programs in which Bouterse could be heard. Once Bouterse became President, only important communiqués from Bouterse were broadcast by _Radio ABC_. This is what his son, Henk Kamperveen revealed. Other than that, there was no reason not to participate in the debate.

Ramcharan emphasizes that Surinam's democracy is not yet strong enough to withstand intimidation. 'Even though the necessary laws have been enacted, our culture has not evolved. Therefore, the journalistic culture must improve so that better reporting will ensue', concludes Ramcharan.

Iwan Brave, chief-editor of _De Ware Tijd (The True Time),_ started writing as a hobby when he was young. After having been the subject matter in an _NRC Handelsblad_ article about youngsters and partying, he wanted to write articles about youngsters himself. He wrote his very first article for _De Volkskrant (The Peoples' Daily)._ In 1996 Brave returned to Surinam where he continued writing columns for _De Volkskrant_ about Surinam. His book _One-Way to Paramaribo_ contains a collection of these columns. Nowadays Brave is engaged in promoting the quality of journalism. He is critical about the superficiality of journalism. That is why he is specifically investing in the improvement of quality journalism in Surinam, by grooming analytical journalism. Since 2015 he tries to do this but what is lacking is the right journalistic culture. So, there is still a long way to go.

Iwan Brave: 'In financial terms media organizations are poor, so the aspect to bank on is passion. If that is lacking, journalists chose for the money which they need here in Surinam'.

# Chapter 4 Economic freedom

Is the Surinamese media in a position to sufficiently remunerate journalists so that they are immune from corruption and able to write articles free from the influence of the government and the business community? The answer is a clear no. The fact that journalists are poorly paid affects the independence and quality of their reporting.

The fact that the law provides for political liberties neither means that in day-to-day work these liberties are guaranteed nor does it mean that these liberties provide economic protection. _NvJ's_ Thomas Bruning observes: 'Journalists' hands are not necessarily tied, but when they criticize the government and/or businesses, external influences could be brought to bear that may lead to the loss of their job. Furthermore, it can lead to a high degree of self-censorship and thus loss of independence'. Poor pay triggers writing for clients, rather than writing as an independent reporter. This is confirmed by _FPU's_ Leon Willems: 'If the media is weak and economically not independent, it is likely that a situation arises in which journalists can no longer write what the public needs to know'. Two aspects are important in this area: (i) independence of the media and (ii) pluralism. As to pluralism, should a journalist lose his or her job, he or she can be employed by another newspaper or radio or TV station'. The low pay for journalists is a big problem in Surinam. The average monthly pay is Euros 600,–. This is too low to lead a decent life and it is not reflective of the work involved. Additional work is done to make ends meet. Freelancers face an even more difficult situation.

Extra work

Because of the low salaries, journalists accept other jobs, such as acting as masters of ceremony during an event, as spokespersons for an institution, or doing commercials. Accepting work in addition to one's day-time job can create dilemmas when, for example, a journalist accepts a job from someone, about whom he or she is supposed to write critical articles in the day-time job. Other journalists don't take outside jobs. They prefer to remain independent. One anonymous source said that she had a mentor who assists her in keeping her independence. Ivan Cairo is concerned: 'The fact that journalists are often forced to take on extra work will affect their reporting; it tends to become shallow and one-sided'.

Snijders does not understand how journalists make both ends meet: 'When I hear what a journalist earns, I really wonder how he or she survives. After having lived in Surinam for 24 years, I still don't understand'. According to him, most media organizations, such as _De Ware Tijd_ , are not poor but there is a lack of appreciation for journalists. A fixed, decent salary for journalists would certainly promote better performance. Chief-editor of _De Ware Tijd_ , Iwan Brave argues that his paper is one of the better paying papers: 'During remuneration negotiations the first thing we demand is better quality writing. I don't say that our journalists don't do their best – they do – but quality is still wanting'.

Many journalists confirm that, should they be paid a higher salary, there would be a reduced need to take a second job. _SvJ_ chairman Wilfred Leeuwin notes that extra work may lead to identification with a particular political party, which – in turn – would make the journalists concerned less independent in the eyes of their readers.

Hobbyism

Iwan Brave shared the following observation: 'Since many media organiztions don't have a lot of money, you have got to have a lot of passion for the profession if you want to be a journalist. If this passion is lacking, many may opt for the money which they need to survive'. Many of the journalists interviewed confirmed that they studied journalism without intending to become one. 'What they want, instead, is to become spokesperson for the government, i.e., a job well-paid, including medical insurance and a pension', according to Snijders. This does not mean that all students have this attitude. There are some who do want to become journalists. Snijders added: 'I had a very good intern, but, unfortunately, I lost her because she could earn a better salary somewhere else'.

The best journalists are poached by the government. Seshma Bisesar says: 'The temptation is just too great to work for a better paying company or the government'. Brave agrees: 'Many journalists left the paper and accepted a government spokesperson job. But there are also journalists who combine different jobs; they do so because a salary paid by a newspaper or radio station is simply insufficient to live on'.

Journalists are offered bribes to stop writing critical articles. One journalist told the following story: 'I was supposed to interview a government minister whom I had wanted to interview for some time. When I arrived at the agreed place, I was met by three men who told me to stop writing about this minister. Instead, they offered me an expensive car. I felt intimidated, but I did not accept the offer. I am not for sale'. As mentioned above, talented journalists are regularly offered well-paid government jobs. One has to have a high 'journalism morale' to withstand the temptation.

Understaffing

Pieter van Maele told me that he met a deputy chief-editor who was lamenting about the shortage of journalists: 'Where can I find them to fill the vacancies?' The shortage of journalists forces editors to appoint less qualified and less experienced staff. Van Maele: 'Despite the fact that these journalists commit professional errors, they are not sacked, because – after all – the newspaper pages have to be filled with text. This situation obviously affects the quality of journalism in Paramaribo'.

There are also journalists in newsrooms put there by Bouterse's political party. An anonymous observer shared the following: 'I know a few journalists of _De Ware Tijd,_ who are prepared to write articles, provided they are paid for them'. Kemble-Starke heard that some journalists publish articles because they had struck a deal with one politician or another. She underscored though that these practices don't happen at _Jeugdjournaal_ because the program is not connected with anybody or any party, and thus can work independently.

Advertisements

The government places many ads in papers; it is a formidable client of the media and, therefore, exerts a great deal of influence. According to _FPU'_ s Leon Willems this is a form of manipulation. For a time _De Ware Tijd_ and _Times of Surinam_ published a bi-weekly section entitled _De Overheid (The Government)_. Diederik Samwel underscored that this section constituted a secure source of income for the papers; they were 'rewarded' for the publishing of government information.

Snijders pointed out that papers would be boycotted by businesses that were portrayed in a bad light. Snijders gave the following example: 'In the past my newspaper was distributed in the VIP room of the _Surinaamse Luchtvaart Maatschappij_ (SLM) ( _Surinam Airlines_ ). However, after I had published an article about SLM's bad financial results, our newspaper disappeared from the VIP room, and SLM stopped advertising with us'. Snijders added that SLM were not amused by the headline: ' _Going down, going down'_. Rita Ramcharan remembers that during her time as chief-editor of _The Times of Surinam_ the income from ads was small. Subsequently, the newspaper's owner, Dilip Sardjoe, introduced an editorial statute to increase income from advertisements.

Louis Alfaisie saw the same happening at _De West_. Alfaisie confirms that big advertisers exert influence on the content of newspapers: 'When your paper writes something questionable about a company that advertisers in your paper, or if big advertisers want something published and it is not being done, they simply stop advertising'. Since most newspapers largely depend on the income from advertisements, this creates a predicament for journalists. 'It feels as if a knife is put at your throat', says Alfaisie. He also emphasizes the role played by the government. Some government bodies have outstanding debts for ads. However, if a newspaper hints at these arrears, the ministry or agency concerned withdraws its advertisements for a considerable period of time. And since the government is by far the largest advertiser, the newspapers continue to be dependent party.

Alfaisie concludes: 'The government wants journalists to apply self-censorship. Suppose a negative piece of information about the government is spread through the grapevine, but some journalists won't pick up the story because they are afraid the government will stop advertising and will not pay the bill. Clearly, the government has a firm grip on the media via its advertising'. This is one of the many reasons for self-censorship in Surinamese journalism. Sensitive information is often not published as it may affect the paper's income. Van Maele: 'It is in the journalists' own interest not to report certain topics'. According to him this dilemma can only be overcome through better remuneration'.

Van Maele argues that at the moment there is just too much media in Surinam given its small population. Cooperation is rare and competition is stiff: 'Suppose there would only be three TV stations, instead of the current eight, there would still be pluralism, and the number of journalists per station could increase. The same would apply to income from commercials which would allow salaries to increase. It would allow journalists to spend more time on a particular issue and/or to study. The same applies to newspapers. Suppose you would have fewer newspapers allowing each to have more journalists. The journalists would have a chance to write articles independent from the government and would be less tempted to join the government. This is the way forward in countering self-censorship and overnment propaganda'.

Louis Alfaisie started his career in the court house and discovered there that there was a big gap between what was happening in court and what the media reported. Alfaisie wondered how much information the population was missing about other social topics. This inspired him to become a journalist. For a long time he was deputy-editor of _De West (The West_ ). In February 1980 grenades were thrown at _De West's_ newsroom after this newspaper had labeled the military's actions as 'mutiny'. This traumatic experience affected the journalists for a long time. _De West_ has recuperated, but the paper still has to brace itself against various accusations.

Louis Alfaisie: 'Before the elections politicians were clearly in the propaganda mode. Now they are back in their ivory towers. It is impossible to get in touch with ministers'.

# Chapter 5 Other Factors

The three factors that determine press freedom: legal framework, political liberty and economic liberty, are not the only factors that journalists in Surinam encounter from day-to- day. Robert Alting, _Parbode_ and _Het Parool_ journalist, says: 'Surinamese society is small, people know each other. Sources are not always willing to either cooperate or will only share the information anonymously. Journalists have a low status in Surinam and they are being paid accordingly. These are also important factors when talking about press freedom'. This chapter discusses the other factors.

Self-censorship

Self-censorship is a special manifestation of censorship. As the term implies journalists censor their own writing. Self-censorship is one of the big problems in Surinam. It is activated by pressure from the government, the business community, and chief-editors. Surinam's small society also plays a part: everybody knows one another. The press takes on a wait-and-see attitude and, thereby, creates an environment in which certain topics may not be reported at all. This phenomenon can't be easily detected or measured, because it is applied before an article is published. Many journalists believe that self-censorship is one of the biggest problems facing press freedom in Surinam.

Snijders, former chief-editor of _Parbode Magazine_ and now news manager at _De Ware Tijd_ says: 'I don't think all journalists use self-censorship in Surinam. However, some certainly do because they fear the consequences of uncensored reporting. But I admit that it's difficult to prove'. More than half of the journalists interviewed say that they use selfcensorship from time to time, even when it is not always necessary. Reasons given were fear as a spillover from the 1980s, unpleasant memories of earlier experiences, the small Surinamese society, possible unpleasant reactions from the Government, losing or exposing sources and, finally, a veto by chief-editors. Self-censorship is also seen as necessary to keep working as a journalist. Personal interests are at play; after all, the risks are considerable when writing critical articles.

Steven van Frederikslust, who works _at Radio 10,_ explains that when a journalist investigates a sensitive topic, he can expect to receive threats by telephone. President Bouterse is identified with suppression and censorship, and this is always at the back of journalists' mind. This reality explains why it is difficult to precisely measure press freedom in Surinam. An anonymous source: 'When during a press conference a journalist asks Bouterse a critical question, I just assume that this will have consequences for the journalist. However, you can't measure it because you don't know whether or not action will be taken'.

_De West's_ Louis Alfaisie argues that self-censorship is not necessarily bad: 'I believe that every medium and every journalist has to make choices by weighing different aspects. However, self-censorship should not be overdone. Journalists should not withhold information because they fear being shot at, or because they fear not being invited to press conferences, or barred from attending them'. According to van Frederikslust, the people in Surinam are by nature not very critical; mutual respect is the dominant feature of Surinamese culture.

This explains why one week a journalist argues one side of an issue, while the next week he takes the opposite stance, according to Diederik Samwel. Van Maele agrees: 'Surinam is a hierarchical society in which relations are fixed. A journalist is respectful to the President and Ministers. This is good form here'. Samwel adds that high respect for authority is a characteristic of local journalism. This respect goes back to colonial times, when all media were in fact mouthpieces of the colonial government, and thus reported what the government said without further research. Jaap Hoogendam explained this attitude in the context of the legal framework. He observed that people in his position are not quickly criticized: 'It is part of the culture, remnants of the colonial era'.

Small society

Surinam's small society plays a prominent role in self-censorship. Apart from the fear of touching on sensitive issues, such as the government and drugs, there is enormous pressure from the society. Population-wise Surinam is small, everybody knows each other. Van Maele observes: 'It is remarkable that certain topics are simply not reported. For example, a few years ago, a large tank full of cocaine was discovered in France, probably having been shipped from Surinam. _De West_ was the only newspaper that reported the discovery. This is simply insufficient coverage given the high news value of the issue'.

_De Ware Tijd's_ Iwan Brave agrees that Surinam's small society complicates reporting: 'Suppose your son is working at _Staatsolie_ (the _National Oil Company_ ) and you are a journalist. And you know that the Surinamese culture is rancorous, what are you going to do?'. Ivan Cairo explains that journalists, precisely because of the small society, often are friends with people or an organization about whom they have to write critically: 'This is why reporting is less objective and is wanting in quality'.

An anonymous source told me: 'When you expose a shady topic, you are bound to run into somebody later on who has something to do with the issue. I am the only journalist in the district and I want to walk around freely, this is why I apply self-censorship'. Nita Ramcharan sees this also happening in her environment. Many media organizations confirm that they use self-censorship. In case you don't have a strong position as a journalist, you may be tempted not to publish an article because you fear that you will no longer receive information from the government, the business community or any other source. Ramcharan herself is strongly opposed to self-censorship: 'I won't be deterred. If I have strong proof of the correctness of what I report, I will publish my article, irrespective of whether or not I know the person I wrote about well. I am a professional journalist. I find self-censorship worse than censorship. When journalists indulge in self-censorship they deceive the readers. I won't do it'. Journalists also use pseudonyms. Snijders: 'I know a few colleagues who have done that, or still do'. They do it when dealing with sensitive topics and expect to get into trouble'. Snijders explains that when a journalist writes a critical article, he or she will soon get into trouble with neighbours, friends or family members. 'After all, Surinam is just like a village', notes Snijders.

Influence of editors

Apart from government pressure and the 'small society effect', chief-editors have veto power. Ramcharan concludes that what one is allowed to publish not only depends on personal interests, but it also depends on the interests of the clients. Both Ramcharan and Leeuwin left their jobs at successive media organizations because their owners meddled in editorial affairs. 'These owners just wanted to have a say in certain topics. That was the straw that broke the camel's back for me', remembers Leeuwin. When van Maele was working for _De Ware Tijd,_ there was sometimes pressure from the chief-editor about what should be written and what not.

An example: in 2010 there were reports in Jamaican newspapers about Bouterse's visit to the United Nations. The rumor had it that he was not invited at Obama's suggestion, because of his shady past. Van Maele remembers: 'I called the American Ambassador in Paramaribo. He could not confirm or deny the rumor. All of a sudden it was then decided that we should not publish this news'. This was, according to van Maele, because Bouterse had just been elected President. 'Everybody was very careful. Other than that, there was also a lot of Dutch anti-Bouterse sentiment, so Surinam's pride was also at stake. But there definitely was also selfcensorship in play'.

Education

Education also has an influence on press freedom. The better people are educated, the greater the chance that press freedom will thrive and be sustained. It is important to invest in the education of journalists and in the quality of journalism. This will instill journalistic mores, which – in turn – make them better at standing one's ground in the Surinamese society.

Academy of higher art and culture

There is much discontent about the journalism curriculum offered by the _Academy of Higher Art and Culture_ (AHAC). The academic level is just too low. Van Maele observed that graduates even make grammatical errors. The curriculum lacks a firm foundation. The same opinion is shared by former students. Soelami Kemble-Starke comments: 'When I am asked about my experience with the _AHAC's_ course, I discourage students. It consists of a cocktail of various subjects: journalism, spokespersonship, and public relations. So, what is exactly the focus of the course? Only during my work at _Jeugdjournaal_ did I learn what journalism is all about'. Another anonymous _AHAC_ student confirms what Kemble-Starke said: 'The subjects taught are journalism-oriented, but only on a theoretical level and rather shallow. Other than that, we didn't get any advice how to work in practice. The teachers are not motivating the students at all'.

According to many, the course, as taught, undermines the quality of journalism in Surinam. A high-quality course would greatly improve the profession. Such a course would inculcate more professional principles in the students which – in turn – would help future journalists defend press freedom, should this be challenged. _SvJ_ chairman Leeuwin agrees: 'The current course is inadequate. The quality is simply bad. It should be improved dramatically'. Leeuwin confirmed that the _SvJ_ is intending to launch a journalism bachelor course, to lead eventually to a full-fledged academic education. The _AHAC_ course is in fact more geared towards public relations. Leewin: 'Many graduates start as a spokesperson or as a public relations officer. For them there is no difference between PR and journalism'. An anonymous source adds: 'One in ten alumni starts as a journalist. The rest goes into PR. It is because journalism isn't promoted at _AHAC_ '. Van Maele observed that journalism is considered some sort of hobby: 'You end up as a journalist because there is nothing else you can do'.

Ramcharan agrees that there is little enthusiasm for being a journalist. She used to be an investigative journalism lecturer at _AHAC_ , but gave it up. There was an adverse teaching culture. There were insufficient educational tools and the lecturers did not coordinate their lectures. Students don't have sufficient time to do their assignments, because they work during the day, and take the course in the evenings. Besides, they don't have a clear idea what journalism is all about. Leeuwin also ended his stint as guest lecturer: 'It is amazing how little the students know even in the third year of the course. They simply lack the basics'. Hoogendam recognizes _AHAC_ interns' lack of knowledge and drive: 'They want to work for the government but hardly know how to write properly. The course is too basic and too shallow'.

Ramcharan says that interns have four practical work periods at various media organizations, each lasting a fortnight. She believes that two weeks at one organization is far too short. Snijders said that at the _Parbode_ he regularly received interns of such a low level that he was forced to ask _AHAC_ to select interns of a level acceptable to _Parbode:_ 'At first we always accepted interns but eventually we had to say no when the quality was not satisfactory. Since then, _AHAC_ hasn't sent us new intern candidates'. A second year _AHAC_ student works at _Parbode_ as a freelancer since Snijders is prepared to invest in young students and they should be stimulated. 'As long as there is progress it is worth the effort. There is, of course, a 'threshold' which an applicant has to be able to cross before being accepted', Snijders underlined.

Brave is also not enthusiastic about _AHAC_ ; he argues that it would be better for students to undergo a three-month internship: 'The course doesn't produce good journalists. They have to learn the profession all over again. I would almost jokingly say that it is better not to say that you completed an _AHAC_ course when applying for a job'. True, _De Ware Tijd_ did employ a few _AHAC_ graduates because they had enough talent. 'Once they start working you notice that they slowly get the knack of it', concludes Brave. According to the people interviewed there is a substantial difference between journalists who studied overseas and those who were trained in Surinam. There are proposals to separate the course in two disciplines: one to focus on journalism and the second on spokespersonship and Public Relations. Another suggestion is to send interns to countries that enjoy press freedom.

Surinamese Association of Journalists

The goal of the _SvJ_ is protection of journalism. The _SvJ_ meets once a month. The membership is around fifty journalists, of whom twenty-five to thirty are active members. The association is a member of the _Association of Caribbean Media workers_ (ACM) which maintains ethical principles and professional codes, in line with the ones adhered to by the _SvJ. ACM_ is an independent body of associations of journalists in the region with the goal to jointly promote journalism and press freedom. _ACM_ attempts to promote its goal, among others, through providing training, lectures and debates about journalism. Unfortunately, this promotion is only applied on an irregular basis. In addition, attendance during these events is very poor. _ACM_ does not provide much information on-line and it is hard to find, as it does not have a website. _ACM_ is on _Facebook_ but apart from a brief description about _ACM'_ s goals, no additional information is provided.

'Adequate communication should constitute the 'lifeline' of an association like _ACM'_ , says _NvJ's_ Thomas Bruning, but if you don't show your members what your association is all about, and what it does , then it is only an association on paper which doesn't provide added value. One's _raison-d'_ êt _re_ is closely connected with what one communicates about one's activities; that is the core of an organization'. Bruning understands that communication can be put on a backburner when that organization is in the middle of important negotiations: 'In a situation like that, you don't communicate all the time how the negotiations are progressing, but in the end it is important to inform your members and other interested parties about what is happening'. _SvJ'_ s Leeuwin is also unhappy about _ACM_ not having a website. He asks the rhetorical question: 'Which association of journalists doesn't have a website in 2017? It is a shame'.

Needless to say, journalists are not happy with the association. Many are of the opinion that the _SvJ_ does not provide value added. Reasons for this sentiment are that the _SvJ_ lacks influence and the fact that few (or no) activities are undertaken. An anonymous journalist commented: 'The _SvJ_ does not protect the interests of journalists in Paramaribo, they only scratch each others' backs, don't have the guts to defend press freedom and they lack financial and other resources'. Still, journalists appreciate _SvJ'_ s existence. There is no argument – there is a great need for an active and innovative association. Some journalists are positive about _SvJ_ , they appreciate their protection and argue that the association emphasizes the importance of independent journalism.

Kemble-Starke admits that she is not a _SvJ_ member and that she does not know much about it. She thinks that the _SvJ_ should inform journalists of major developments: 'I would love to attend their training sessions which would give me a feeling of being part of the association'. On 9 December 2013 the _Jeugdjournaal_ wanted to air an item about the December murders; but the _SvJ_ did not bother to form an opinion about it. Kemble-Starke remembers that she and colleagues went to the _SvJ_ to learn what its opinion was: 'I find this an expression of _SvJ'_ s indolence, because when something like this happens, the _SvJ_ should have reacted promptly and strongly'.

Snijders agrees that the _SvJ_ is not very proactive: 'When I was threatened by someone pointing a gun at my head, I phoned the _SvJ_ and asked them to issue a statement in protest. They said that they would, but in the end they never did'. Snijders understands _SvJ's_ situation, in that the members are all journalists with heavy workloads and, therefore, lack the capability to react to everything quickly, but still feels that the _SvJ_ should have issued a statement. He argues: ' _SvJ_ should have very active members in the association like the Dutch _NvJ_ , which in similar circumstances would have reacted immediately'. Since the _SvJ_ is not forceful in defending their members, and journalism in Surinam at large, they are in a weak position. The _SvJ_ could do a lot more in defending journalists in court. If there would be clear ethical codes for journalism to which journalists must adhere, then the _SvJ_ could issue objective opinions and statements defending their professionalism.

_SvJ's_ chairman agrees that the association does not offer value added. But he explains that the _SvJ_ lacks the financial and human resources to implement its plans: 'There is nobody who takes action without being paid and _SvJ_ lacks the budget to foot the bill'. Seshma Bissesar thinks this statement is nonsense. She points out that there is a lot of information on the Internet which can be downloaded free of charge: 'The _SvJ_ can easily and without cost make use of this information. For example, a lot of lectures are available on _You Tube_ , delivered by highly professional and knowledgeable people'.

Van Maele agrees with those who think that the _SvJ_ should defend journalists in trouble: ' _SvJ_ could for example investigate self-censorship and propaganda. Creating solidarity is also important so that a climate is created in which journalists themselves will speak up about self-censorship'. Leeuwin argues that journalists should also shoulder part of the blame: 'There is little commitment and there is slackness'. An example: when the _SvJ_ organises a training, invitations are sent out via e-mail to all members; however, the attendance is very poor. This is bad, according to Leeuwin, but he understands that journalists have a heavy workload which leaves little time for other activities. Yet, Leeuwin isn't happy with the members' commitment: 'The association can undertake all kinds of activities, but as long as the individual journalist isn't motivated to participate, there is not much we can do'.

An anonymous journalist observes that there are journalists who want to unify, but _SvJ_ does not appeal to them as it does not undertake much: 'Wilfred points his finger at us saying that we don't attend the meetings. But what is being discussed during these meeting is often irrelevant and our time is precious. When the _SvJ_ organizes meetings it should make sure that the information offered will be useful to us'.

Snijders confirms that few journalists pay attention to the _SvJ: 'SvJ_ is weak. When it issues a statement, there is no follow-up. That is why journalists don't pay attention'. Many journalists believe that a well-functioning association could go a long way to improving the quality of journalism in particular and of press freedom in general. This – in turn – would result in better protection of and support for journalists in the execution of their work.

Ramcharan: 'There is need for an active organization, but the _SvJ_ is not active, and that's a pity. True, many journalists have also a political agenda, so there is little unity among them. If journalists were to perform their tasks well, the _SvJ_ could function well'. _NvJ'_ s Bruning believes that it is difficult to establish an association of journalists in a small society: 'Paramaribo finds itself on a regional level, the society is just too small'.

Despite the criticisms, the _SvJ_ looks to the future with optimism. Leeuwin: 'We should continue trying to attract new members. Once you have a group of ten to twenty people who consult the website, the media organizations will accept the _SvJ_ as a genuine interest group. Especially when the _SvJ_ has established a committee that shares the enthusiasm for journalism, we could be valuable to a lot more journalists'.

Other factors

Political affiliation

Many journalists are members of the media committees of political parties. Ramcharan: 'Party politics has infiltrated various media organizations. This compromises the independence of journalists'. There is no distinction between different jobs in the media in Surinam. Leeuwin argues that a distinction should be made between 'pure' journalists and journalists employed in positions related to journalism: 'When a journalist is involved in writing advertisement copy for the government, he or she can only be critical when it suits him or her. It depends on the political affiliation of the particular journalist. When nobody wants to talk to a journalist any longer, press freedom is in danger'.

According to the _SvJ_ chairman, the problem is also that the salaries of journalists are too low and that the quality of their training is poor. Media directors employ journalists who do not show much dedication to the profession. Yet they hire them because the paper's editorial section is understaffed. In many cases professional journalists, when offered a job, will refuse it because the salary offered is just too low: 'Media organizations are not prepared to pay higher salaries. One media owner told me: 'News creates itself. I am not prepared to pay people much to make news'.

The conclusions derived from interviews with many journalists are that there is a great need for independent editorial staffs and for fewer political affiliations. _Parbode Magazine's_ Hoogendam only wants to employ independent journalists: 'Many journalists have side jobs. They do things for _lanti,_ big firms, or they do public relations jobs on the side. I don't want them, because it would affect their independence'. Ramcharan agrees that independent journalism is only possible if a journalist is free from any political influence. According to her there are quite a few media who take sides, and that is acceptable, provided it is clear to the citizens: 'It is unfair to the citizens if the media concerned is not open about the political philosophy it supports. You can't pretend to be independent and objective when this is simply not the case. Citizens have a right to authentic and honest information, since without it, they cannot form their own opinions. During election campaign time, there is a lot of manipulation of information so that citizens get the wrong impression and, consequently, make wrong choices'.

Brave agrees with Ramcharan; he also is not against media organizations taking sides, unless they engage in manipulating their readers, listeners,or viewers. An example would be _Radio ABC_ : 'After the founding father of _ABC_ had been executed, the radio station decided to let everybody speak, with the exception of Bouterse, the murderer and destroyer of the founding father. This is not manipulative, because _Radio ABC_ had clearly stated what it intended to do and why. Now that Bouterse is the president of the republic, the situation is different. He can be heard on _Radio ABC_ in his capacity as president to inform the citizens, but the station will never interview him'. This is _FPU's_ Leon Willems' verdict: The politicized media landscape, which was created well before Desi Bouterse was re-elected president, is the result of gaps in the legal framework, and in curbed political and economic liberties, which – together – explain the deficiencies in press freedom.

Dutch influence

Desi Bouterse is a favorite topic in the Dutch media. Cairo believes that the Dutch body politic feeds the media in this respect: 'The attention paid to him in the media is almost institutionalized. This explains why more important issues do not get the attention they deserve in the Dutch media'. According to Leeuwin it is this Dutch media attention that makes Bouterse even more popular in Surinam.

Willems explains: 'It would be better for ex-colonizers not to pay too much attention to their former colonies. Other countries are better placed to do so. This advice would be accepted quicker, if nationalism, hurt pride and sensitivities did not play such a large role'. It is easily recognized in everyday life in Surinam that criticism from Dutch professionals is not well received and it is often counterproductive. The Bouterse administration maintains that The Hague is doing everything to put Surinam in a bad light. Samwel writes that reports in the Dutch media during the 1980s are labeled as propaganda and considered as an obsession with history. _SvJ'_ s chairman agrees: 'The influence of Dutch media in Surinam should be reduced. Moreover, Dutch political influence on independent Surinamese institutions and Surinamese media is absolutely wrong'.

Bissesar explains that Surinamese people are very sensitive to criticism: 'Especially when it comes from a Caucasian from Holland who tells us how to do things better'. Dutch journalists who work in Paramaribo also experience this in their work. Snijders says that he is not invited to events such as those organized by the _SvJ_. 'The _SvJ_ is of the opinion that our newspaper isn't really a Surinamese paper. They say that there are many Dutch journalists working for us, and that the chief-editor is Caucasian, which as Snijders notes, is no longer the case'.

Snijders: 'When the case against _Parbode_ brought by Noreen Cheung was prosecuted, the rumor in the Assemblee was that the _Parbode_ was managed from the Netherlands and that _Parbode_ was in actual fact a Dutch newspaper. But we only interviewed Cheung, and she knows damned well that _Parbode_ is a Surinamese newspaper. But the 'Dutch influence card', is quickly played, so to speak, and this attitude doesn't change'.

Hoogendam points out that _Parbode Magazine_ first appeared ten years ago and is doing well: 'True, the publisher is a Dutchman but the contents of the paper is all about Surinam. It is produced in Paramaribo and printed in Poland. This is because there are no printing facilities in Surinam that can compete in price and quality with Polish printers. Between thirty and forty percent of our sales are in Holland. So in this sense, _Parbode_ is also a bit a Dutch paper'. Hoogendam emphasizes that _Parbode_ is dedicated to good journalism: 'We do our job and publish articles of high quality, I hope. We also strive to employ Surinamese journalists. There definitely are good Surinamese journalists, but they already have jobs. They work at other media organizations where they have a fixed contract and, therefore, will not easily cross over'.

According to Samwel Dutch journalists should continue to work in Surinam and do their job with a nuanced and broader perspective. In addition, they should share their professional expertise with Surinamese colleagues, conduct master-classes and accept interns. An anonymous journalist told me that good cooperation would make a big difference in Surinamese journalism: 'The spread of knowledge is inadequate in Surinam; that is why there is no improvement in the quality. It is important for me – being a journalism student – that this shortcoming will be removed'. What Bissesar misses is more camaraderie among journalists, and she considers this the most important challenge: 'Journalists criticize each other and are competitive. Once there is more collegiality among them, the working environment will certainly improve'.

Journalists in Surinam

Trying to do good journalism in Surinam is often obstructed. Many journalists encounter sources unwilling to share the information that is crucial to writing an informative article. This is a formidable hindrance. Some journalists, however, say that some sources are willing to cooperate, albeit anonymously. This happens all the time at _Parbode Magazine._ When a corruption case is brought to the attention of this magazine, and sources are being approached for confirmation, they typically decline to talk when they learn that they will be identified as a source. Van Maele: 'They decline. People only want to contribute anonymously. This prevents journalism from becoming credible. As soon as informants are identified as whistle-blowers, it is the end of the story'. This is to a large extent caused by corruption.

Suppose you are an entrepreneur and you take a critical stance vis-à-vis the government, you might as well forget getting new contracts from them, the loss of which will lead to bankruptcy. Corruption is the most important factor that undermines press freedom. Given the fact that the _Parbode_ is the only opinion magazine and known for its investigative journalism, their journalists often hit a brick wall.

Snijders: 'When I wanted to interview people they would respond: ' _Parbode_? No!'. It once happened that Snijders ended up in a dispute with a couple of directors in a particular Ministry after he had published a critical article: 'I had tried many times to get hold of these directors but my many phone calls were not answered. In the end we decided to publish the article without the intended reaction from the ministry. Immediately after publication, the ministry called and told us that we would face the consequences because we had not given them the opportunity to tell their side of the story. I responded that we had tried many times to get their reaction before the article was published, without success. We haven't heard from them since'. Snijders tells me that he has at least thirty stories in mind that he wants to investigate, but it is difficult to get started: 'Often sources only want to comment anonymously, or when I approach the right people who know the ins-and-outs of the story, and they don't want to talk, it's the end of the story'.

Brave argues that informants who want to be quoted only anonymously, are a bit over cautious: 'Even if the information is totally innocuous people don't want their name mentioned, because even then they fear the consequences. They don't want to be photographed, even if it's in connection with a positive story. Brave finds Surinam a fantastic country for a journalist; however, it is professionalism and integrity that – put together – make good journalism: 'A journalist can write a story with a lot of anonymous sources, but what he or she invests in the story to make it trustworthy, convincing and balanced, is what is important. And to do so, you have to investigate'.

Brave then commented on the issue of corruption: 'When you can't prove that corruption is involved, then – at least – you can take the reader by the hand in your story and walk him or her towards getting to the bottom of the case. When you do so, you draw attention to the case while showing that you hit the proverbial brick wall which stopped you from reaching the right conclusion'. Brave notes that this type of journalism is rarely being done; only a few journalists do thorough research when writing stories: 'Almost all of us want to do the work behind a desk and interview government ministers. This does not produce a rounded story. I believe that it is my duty to enlist people with passion, who are prepared to take up the challenge'.

Ramcharan agrees: 'People do not always want to talk, but journalists have to be inventive. A document or another piece of proof will also do'. With this statement she emphasizes that journalists have to develop the skills to do journalism in Surinam. As noted above, journalists have a low status in Surinam. Many know they are not appreciated by the society and the government. Snijders: 'Indeed, journalists don't have much prestige here. People say when journalists write critical articles, that they must be lying. I believe that if we were to make a list of the most popular jobs in Surinam, journalists would be at the bottom, just above politicians, who would be solidly at the bottom of the list'.

Ivan Cairo: 'I'd like to see that journalists will become internationally oriented and broaden their technical skills, to sharpen their knowledge, and improve their journalistic skills'.

For a few years Ivan Cairo studied law but in 1995 he started to work as a journalist. At the moment he is one of the most critical journalists in Surinam writing articles of high quality. His journalistic passion dawned when he was 15 years old. He dreamt of searching for information and informing the people of Surinam by writing truthful articles. At the moment his hope is that all journalists will deepen their knowledge of journalism to boost the quality of journalism. Cairo has the impression that, nowadays, the press takes a more critical stance and that the population feels freer to openly share their opinions. 'This is a very positive development', concludes Cairo.

# Chapter 6 Fertile soil

Press freedom is threatened in Surinam and this has had a negative effect on the quality of journalism. Obstacles to press freedom created by various parties have restricted the ability of journalists to attain the journalistic quality they want. This adverse environment in which journalism is functioning in Surinam does not promote the motivation to improve the situation. Cut-and-paste work of government press releases more and more overtakes authentic journalism. So, the population is offered more propaganda. One obstacle is the lack of a journalistic tradition. It is vital that a truly independent and critical press emerges in the country and it is inspiring to see that there is a group of journalists committed to bringing this about.

Criticism of Surinamese journalism

Surinamese society is very critical of the poor quality of the press. In 2014, for example, Chandrikapersad Santhokhi, chairman of the Vooruitstrevende Hervormings Partij (VHP) _(Progressive Reform Party)_ , a political party, complained on a _Radio ABC_ program that he was not happy with the quality of reporting. He described reporters as passive. He added that in the past journalists were better prepared and asked the right questions whereas, nowadays, critical journalists seem to have disappeared. Seshma Bissesar agrees and says sternly: 'During the time of the previous government journalists spoke up and there was a critical attitude. When people tell me that they are afraid because of the 1980s and because of Bouterse, I say that this is nonsense. The 1980s are long gone. Journalists don't value their integrity. When you know that people don't speak the truth, why not question it? Why don't you expose it? Don't get bribed; your job is to properly inform the citizens. The highest power is in the hands of the people!'.

_Starnews's_ Nita Ramcharan, agrees that journalistic quality is deteriorating. This is a reflection of what is happening in the society: 'Generally speaking the population is not well educated. This explains why people think: when the government says so, it must be true. The media should honestly inform the population and make them aware what is true and what is false'. Louis Alfaisie also agrees: 'I am not always happy with the quality of journalism in this country; however, journalism organizations form part of Surinamese society, so they can't be different from the society. Bissesar emphasizes the role played by the low educational level of the population: 'The people don't read with a critical mind, hence they can be fooled without noticing it'. Ramcharan argues that, therefore, journalists should explain the issues at hand in a clear and logical manner, so that the reader will understand what is at hand: 'I admit that it is difficult for a journalist to criticize a government statement. I believe it is important to do honest reporting, but I understand that it will take a long time to achieve this'. Journalism is very much focused on Paramaribo. Ramcharan: 'And even then, we are not doing a good job'. There is no media organization in Surinam that closely follows world news.

Agenda journalism

Pieter van Maele tells me that each morning many journalists check which press releases and announcements of conferences that have come in and write their daily articles on this information. Diederik Samwel agrees with van Maele's observation: 'It is unusual for journalists to delve a bit deeper than what they find each morning. A press release is copied without further comment; why would you criticize it? This involves more work and that takes time'. _De Ware Tijd's_ Iwan Brave comes across this agenda journalism in his paper's news room as well. He finds it hard to stimulate his staff to write longer articles for the paper's _Mens en Maatschappij (People and Society)_ section. They say that this was not included in their contract: 'A culture emerged here in Surinam that believes that writing three or four articles per day represents good journalism'. Brave has a hard time to get his journalists to write a background piece; they will only do so when paid extra. Before Brave became chief-editor, several strikes were staged in protest. Brave remembers that journalists flatly refused to write for the website if they were not paid extra: 'I want to change this attitude. But I admit that the extra I want from them is not stipulated in their contract. There is a long way ahead'.

Armand Snijders observes that it is difficult to change the attitude, not in the least since the union of journalists and technical staff is powerful. He comments: 'Never mind the unions; a good journalist is committed. He or she would not mind writing a background article or five news items. In many cases, professional passion is lacking. Journalism is just like any other job it seems; this is the current attitude'.

Understaffed

Van Maele argues that understaffing and low salaries explain why this agenda journalism is ongoing. Alfaisie has the same opinion; there are few journalists and the media are often understaffed. The problem is twofold: 'The journalism course produces more spokespersons than journalists. Secondly, the government is an attractive employer. Many talented journalists can't withstand government's 'pull' because of its attractive pay and social security'. _SvJ's_ Wilfred Leeuwin says that media organizations are forced to employ inexperienced staff. At the same time there is no time to thoroughly train them. This obviously affects the quality of what they produce.

Brave: 'I often edit articles of which I think: this is only fit for the shredder'. From time to time, he receives complaints from readers, pointing out mistakes. This gives a sloppy impression. He laments: 'The articles I check before publication are so littered with mistakes that it is impossible to correct all of them'. The editing department is understaffed, and there is too little time to do a good job and maintain an acceptable quality. Brave intends to invest in better training of _De Ware Tijd's_ junior journalists. He wants to replace agenda journalism by investigative and analytical journalism, by producing analyses, writing editorials and offering background information: 'I want to see the staff grow and evolve into 'new journalists'. In the past many inexperienced and 'weak' journalists were hired, but this is over now: 'I rather work with a few passionate journalists who gradually improve than with journalists who write reasonable copy in grammatical terms, but totally lack journalistic mores'. It is going to be a long process, but it can be done with a top-notch editorial team: 'Journalists who are prepared to learn the ropes and do journalistic practice, will improve. In this way you invest in quality step-by-step'.

However, it is not that simple; most journalists combine their journalistic work with another job or they take an evening course. In addition, they have to write too many articles every day because of understaffing. This prevents them from delving a bit deeper into important topics. This partly explains the poor quality of investigative journalism in Surinam. _Parbode's_ Jaap Hoogendam confirms that investigative journalism could be improved a lot in Surinam: 'I believe it is a combination of laziness and a lack of money. We notice it ourselves as well. Writing backgrounders takes time: research is required, archives have to be consulted and many people have to be interviewed. Finding solid material takes time'.

We face two problems, adds Hoogendam: 'Often we don't have the money to invest and you have to find a journalist who is capable of doing the job. It takes on average three to four weeks to write a background article. But then you have a top story of several pages. In this area, _Parbode_ plays a useful role in Surinam'. Nonetheless, Hoogendam is still not satisfied as he wants to see more quality reporting in his magazine: 'Twenty percent of what we now publish is below the quality I would like to see. It takes the editors quite a lot of time to correct and improve the copy'. Yet, Hoogendam is positive about his staff. He recognizes the shortcomings in other papers as well: ' _De Ware Tijd_ is a quality newspaper. But now and again there is slippage. The paper's _Mens en Maatschappij_ section has a lot of potential, but to date it is a bit shallow, lacking debate'.

Professional shortage

The problem in Surinam with independent journalism is the shortage of truly professional journalists, says Ramcharan. Snijders remembers that during his time at _Parbode_ he faced this problem as well: 'There were two or three journalists who could do investigative journalism and had the guts to do so. Generally speaking, there are only a few people who have the pluck to write opinion pieces; and this ability is rare among freelancers in Surinam. True, you've got to have the talent to do this; this also applies to Dutch journalists, by the way'.

Brave is aware of the scarcity of professional journalists and would like to help solve it: 'The other day one of our journalists wrote an article about a person who had started an association. However, the journalist had not bothered to visit the organization. This is unacceptable. So when I give the instruction I should add: 'Visit the place, and give it context'. This is another way of going about your profession'. Leeuwin explains that journalists are often badly informed which explains why it is difficult for them to put stories in context: 'Only a few of them get to the bottom of a topic. There isn't much through thinking'. Creativity is lacking as well. Kemble-Starke observes that a journalist's vantage point is always the same, news updates are rare, and the central question any writer has to ask: who is my reader; for whom do I write, is not taken into account. But, adds Kemble-Starke, you can't blame them. Journalists don't have identical educational backgrounds and working experience.

Brave underlines that there is a shortage of professionals in journalism. _De Ware Tijd_ is a Surinamese company, which is, relatively speaking, producing a professional product. Nonetheless, foreign expertise is still required: 'We really need this. If we depend on local personnel only, it is going to be a long haul before we can change for the better'. Steven van Frederikslust observes that the majority of journalists have a 'hit-and-run' mentality: quickly score a quote, and that's it. Given this attitude, style, spelling and checking one's sources are overlooked. Let alone, the search for fresh information. Brave shares some of his experience: 'At times, I get a shock when I read articles from my staff. Sometimes, the quality is really bad. This does not only go for journalists of _De Ware Tijd,_ it also is true for Dutch freelancers, who had a good education'. Brave explains that only since 2000 the country has been improving. But no journalistic culture has as yet developed in Surinam: 'The problem is not only a Surinamese problem; I believe it is wider than that'.

Ramcharan is not sure whether the golden journalistic rule: 'one source is as good as no source', is applied in many newsrooms. Snijders reacts: 'In case there is a double check and sources have provided different information, the question which source had the correct information is never investigated'. Snijders admits that now and again, in the past, he did too little _fact checking_ in the past himself. He added that he will improve on this shortcoming. Since January 2016 _Parbode_ is running a fact check section, entitled _Dus Dat (Therefore, that_ ), in which every month a sweeping statement is checked. The section's motto is: 'We live in a country of wild stories. In the street, in the newspaper, in parliament: one sweeping statement is followed by another _tori_ **.** But are they correct?'.

Plagiarism

'Many journalists in Surinam practice plagiarism, by not mentioning a source', tells Ramcharan. Various journalists run into problems when they do it. There are a lot of complaints about this, notes Bissesar, but nobody puts a stop to it. But she adds: 'I want to give an example by fighting plagiarism!'.

According to _De Ware Tijd's_ Ivan Cairo _,_ the term plagiarism is perhaps too strong a term for what is being done. He condemns the way how, in particular, radio stations make use of material written by newspaper and news site journalists, without mentioning the source. Radio stations that don't have their own reporters, but broadcast news bulletins are especially guilty of this offense: 'These stations simply copy articles from a newspaper and then present them as their own in-house reporting. No original source is ever mentioned'.

Passion

The problems discussed above are caused by the journalists themselves in the first place. Bissesar: 'I believe you have to do your job with a strong conviction. Journalism is _passion_. If you can't give it your all, you won't be able to do a good job, especially not in Surinam. Journalism is not the same as an eight-to-four job; it is a lifestyle. And you have to put your passion into it. If you don't have it, find another job and give another person a chance'. Snijders does not agree; _Parbode_ journalists have passion, he maintains. 'We have people who are very dedicated. The biggest problem for many journalists is lack of time. This is because they study on the side, or work for other media'. Snijders says that when a journalist is good, he or she is very welcome at whichever media.

According to Ramcharan journalists are often not prepared to accept criticism and don't want to learn from their mistakes. This attitude has to change. A good education in journalism can indeed make a difference. Bissesar adds that there is too much competition instead of cooperation: 'How can we improve journalism in this environment? If you want to be critical, you should be prepared to be criticized. I am quite prepared to receive criticism, which helps to improve my work'.

Impressed

Bissesar finds that not all negative opinions about journalism in Surinam is justified. One can't compare Surinam with other countries: 'I am proud of Surinamese journalists. Often they combine their job with that of cameraman and/or editor. The average journalist has to produce at least three items per day; this heavy load undermines the quality of their work'. Leeuwin confirms that there are a handful of well-educated journalists, who are knowledgeable and analytical and are very much prepared to help improve the situation. But the attempts have not been very successful so far. It is not always possible for an editor to improve an article because the journalist who wrote it happens to be away on another assignment.

Alfaisie is even more impressed by the achievements of Surinamese journalists, given that they face so many headwinds in doing their job, including that there is no law about the disclosure of public documents: 'Journalists bring a lot of issues to light thanks to their inventiveness, their networks and information from the society, while they risk losing their job'. Kemble-Starke emphasizes that too few journalists have to do too much work: 'They work from early in the morning till late at night and are poorly paid'. Leeuwin concludes: 'This is why it is such a pity that they are not able to add an extra dimension to their profession, for which they work so hard'.

# Acknowledgments

This book could not have been written without the assistance of the Eva Tas Foundation, Rudolf Geel and Jan Honout, the critical comments of Tom van Moll, Huub Lakerveld, dear colleagues at _Parbode,_ all journalists and people I had the privilege of interviewing, family and friends who listened endlessly to my stories and experiences about this book's subject. _Grantangi!_

# References

Admin (21 June 2016)'President issues statements during DNA meeting'. Consulted on 21 June 2016: http://www.worldnieuws.com/de-ware-tijd/breaking-presidentdoet-uitspraken-tijdens-dna-vergadering

Alfaisie, L. [Personal interview about journalism in Surinam], 14 November 2015

Alting, R. [Personal interview about press freedom in Surinam], 28 August 2014

Amnesty International (2014) ' _December murders and Moiwana (Surinam)'_. Consulted on 19 September 2014: http://www.amnesty.nl/mensenrechten/encyclopedie/decembermoorden-en-moiwana-suriname

Anonymous source nr. 1 [Personal interview about press freedom in Surinam], 17 January 2014

Anonymous source nr. 2 [Personal interview about press freedom in Surinam], 13 October 2014

Anonymous source nr. 3 [Personal interview about journalism in Surinam], 10 November 2015

Anonymous source nr. 4 [Personal interview about journalism in Surinam], 12 November 2015

Bartels, V. (9 October 2014) ' _Serious repression eclipsed by subtle subversion'_. Consulted on 2 November 2014: http://debuitenlandredactie.nl/2014/10/ernstige-onderdrukkingmaakt-plaats-voor-subtiele-ondermijning

Bissesar, S. [Personal interview about journalism in Surinam], 16 January 2014

Bissesar, S. [Personal interview about journalism in Surinam], 13 November 2015

Boerboom, H. (5 April 2012) ' Amnesty Law victory for Bouterse'. Consulted on 7 January 2015: http://nos.nl/artikel/359163-amnestiewet-overwinning-bouterse.html

Braak van den , S. (2014) Seshma Bissesar; _'I want to give a good example'_. 1 March, 2014, p. 14, 15, 16, 17

Braak van den, S. (February 2015) Bachelor thesis _Press freedom in Paramaribo_. HvA

Braak van den, S. (2 May 2015) ' _Journalists don't feel free'_. Consulted on 2 May 2015: http://dagbladdewest.com/2015/05/02/journalisten-voelen-zich-niet-helemaal-vrij

Brave, I. [Personal interview about journalism in Surinam], 17 November 2015

Bruning, T. [Personal interview about press freedom], 19 December 2014

Cairo, I. [Personal interview about journalism in Surinam], 14 October 2016

_Dagblad Suriname_ ( _Surinam Daily_ ) (8 May 2014) ' _Parbode_ rebuts DNA member Cheung'. Consulted on 6 January 2015: http://www.dbsuriname.com/dbsuriname/index.php/parbode-dient-dna-lid-cheung-van-repliek

_De Surinaamse krant_ ( _The Surinam Newspaper_ ) (9 November 2015) ' _Two policemen and three robbers in hospital with gun wounds'._ Consulted on 20 November 2015: http://www.de-surinaamse-krant.com/2015/11/twee-overvallers-door-agenten.html

_De Volkskrant (The Peoples Newspaper_ )(30 June 2016) _'Military Tribunal Surinam suspends murder process against Bouterse'._ Consulted on 30 June 2016: http://www.volkskrant.nl/buitenland/krijgsraad-suriname-schort-moordproces-tegenbouterse-op~a4330138

De Ware Tijd (The True Time) (5 January 2014) ' _Criticism of politicians on journalists is a good sign_ '. Consulted on 14 April 2014: http://dwtonline.com/laatstenieuws/2014/01/05/kritiek-op-journalisten-vanuit-politiek-goed-teken

_De West (The West)_ (30 November 2015) ' _Alcoa pulls out Surinamese bauxite sector'_. Consulted on 16 November 2015: http://dagbladdewest.com/2015/11/30/alcoahoudt-na-eeuw-surinaamse-bauxietsector-voor-gezien

DNA (2014) _Constitution of Surinam_. Consulted on 30 September 2014: http://www.dna.sr/wetgeving/surinaamse-wetten/geldende-teksten-tm-2005/grondwetsuriname

Facebook. (2015) ' _Surinam Association of Journalists'_. Consulted on 8 November 2014: https://www.facebook.com/pages/De-Surinaamse-Vereniging-van-Journalisten/421897307878634

_Freedom House_. (2014) _Freedom of the press 2014_ Report]. [https://freedomhouse.org/sites/default/files/FOTP_2014.pdf

_Freedom House._ (2017) _Freedom in the world 2017. Surinam Profile_. Consulted on 19

February 2017: https://freedomhouse.org/report/freedom-world/2017/suriname

Free Press Unlimited (22 October 2014) ' _10 Years and 10 minutes Youth Journal in Surinam_ '. Consulted on 1 December 2014, From: https://www.freepressunlimited.org/nl/nieuws/10-jaar-10-minuten-jeugd-journaal-in-suriname

GOV (2014) _The Government_. Consulted on 20 July 2014: http://www.gov.sr/kabinet-van-de-vice-president/documenten/de-overheid.aspx

Hendriks, L. (24 March 2013) ' _A gun was pointed at my head because I wrote lies'_. Consulted on 22 October 2015: http://www.denieuwereporter.nl/2013/03/ikkreeg-een-pistool-tegen-mijn-kop-want-ik-schreef-leugens

_Het Persmuseum_. (23 September 2004) _Press freedom lecture_. Consulted on 20 October 2014: http://www.persvrijheid.nl/uploadedfiles/persvrijheidlezing2004.pdf

Hoogendam, J. [Personal interview about journalism in Surinam], 13 June 2016

Kemble-Starke, S. [Personal interview about journalism in Surinam], 25 November 2014

Lamé, E. (4 September 2014) _'Bouterse is his own judge'_. Katern, p. 13

Leeuwin, W. [Personal interview about _Surinam Association of Journalists_ ], 26 November 2014

Leeuwin, W. [Personal interview about journalism in Surinam], 18 November 2015

Maele van, P. (1 April 2014) ' _Noreen Cheung (NDP) still in doubt about Amnesty Law'._ Consulted on 6 January 2015: http://www.parbode.com/parbode-interview/item/5059-noreen-cheung

Maele van, P. [Personal interview about Surinamese journalism and press freedom], 16 December 2014

Maele van, P. (2014) ' _Self-censorship limits press freedom in Surinam'_. Consulted on 16 April 2014: http://www.tone-app.nl/surinaamse-persvrijheid

NOS (9 June 2016) ' _Military Tribunal Surinam: December murders case must continue'_. Consulted on 9 June 2016: http://nos.nl/artikel/2110058-krijgsraad-surinamestrafzaak-decembermoorden-moet-doorgaan.html

NOS (21 June 2016) _'Bouterse is heading towards curfew to escape verdict'_. Consulted on 21 June 2016: http://nos.nl/nieuwsuur/artikel/2112544-bouterse-stuurt-aanop-noodtoestand-om-strafeis-te-voorkomen.html

Ramcharan, N. [Personal interview about Surinamese journalism and press freedom], 2 December 2014

Ramcharan, N. [Personal interview Surinamese journalism], 13 November 2015

_Reporters without borders_ (2016) _Index details. Data of press freedom ranking 2016_. Consulted on 19 February 2017: https://rsf.org/en/ranking_table

Samwel, D. (22 November 2012) ' _Surinamese press not yet mature'_. Consulted on 28 November 2014: http://www.villamedia.nl/opinie/bericht/surinaamse-pers81nog-niet-volwassen/

Samwel, D. (3 January 2013) ' _The press in Surinam'_. De Volkskrant. Media, p. 16 & 17

Samwel. D. (2013) ' _His master's voice; Surinamese media lack criticism'_. VPRO gids

Snijders, A. [Personal interview about Surinamese journalism], 19 November 2015

Snijders, A. [Personal interview about Surinamese journalism], 24 November 2015

Snijders, M., Dijck, J. van., Greven, M. et.al. (1995) _Ethics in journalism_. Amsterdam: Otto Cramwincke

Stieven Ramdharie. (30 January 2017) ' _Military Tribunal: charge against Desi Bouterse expected on 9 February'._ Consulted on 30 January 2017: http://www.volkskrant.nl/binnenland/krijgsraad-strafeis-tegen-desi-bouterse-wordt-op-9-februariuitgesproken~a4455487

Sumter, A., Sens, A., Koninck, M, de. et.al. (2008) _K'ranti. The Surinamese press_. Amsterdam: Kit Publishers

Surinamepress. (2013) ' _Newspaper de Ware Tijd wants to ban a book'_. Consulted on 12 August 2013: http://surinamepress.com/nieuws/tag/meredith-helstone

Surinamepress. (2013) ' _Parbode has to be taken off the shelves'_. Consulted on 12 August 2014: http://surinamepress.com/nieuws/parbode-moet-uit-de-schappen

Trouw. (9 February 2017) ' _December murders again postponed'_. Consulted on 9 February 2017: https://www.trouw.nl/democratie/proces-decembermoordentoch-weer-uitgesteld~acb6f34a

Tuitel, R. (2016) ' _Press freedom, the problems of censorship and how to tackle them'_. Consulted on 19 October 2016: http://www.sen-foundation.org/wp-content/uploads/Personvrijheid-de-problemen-van-censuur-en-hoe-die-aan-te-pakken.pdf

Waterkant (9 November 2015) ' _Police kill two robbers during exchange of fire'_. Consulted on 20 November 2015: http://www.waterkant.net/suriname/2015/11/09/politie-doodt-twee-rovers-tijdens-vuurgevecht

Waterkant (18 June 2016) ' _Commission Desi Bouterse' issues communiqué'._ Consulted on 18 June 2016: https://www.waterkant.net/suriname/2016/06/18/commissie-desibouterse-stuurt-communique

Willems, L. [Personal interview about press freedom], 23 December 2014.
Previously published in this series

Honduras - Dina Meza, _Kidnapped_ (2015)

Vietnam - Bui Thanh Hieu, _Speaking in Silence_ (2015)

China - Sofie Sun, _Drugs for the Mind_ (2015)

Ethiopia - Bisrat Handiso, _Genocide of Thought_ (2015)

Macedonia - Tomislav Kezharovski, _Likvidacija/Annihilation_ (2015)

Cuba - Amir Valle, _Gagged_ (2016)

Cuba - Amir Valle, _Palabras Amordazadas_ (2016)

Bangladesh - Parvez Alam _, Disappearing Public Spheres_ (2016)

Turkey - Fréderike Geerdink, _Bans, Jails and Shameless Lies_ (2016)

Economics - Peter de Haan, _Censorship Alert_ (2016)

Printed copies are available for free while supplies last at

janhonout@evatasfoundation.com

As an ebook via the common outlets.

# Colophon

A fri wortu / The free word

Censorship in Surinam

Copyright © Sylvana van den Braak

Translated by Peter de Haan

ISBN E-boek 9789082747300

ISBN Boek 9789082520071

nur 600

www.evatasfoundation.com

Amsterdam 2017
