# Suriname - United States Department of State

- Suriname HomeReportsBureau of Democracy, Human Rights, and Labor2023 Country Reports on Human Rights Practices&#8230;Suriname				hide	document.addEventListener("DOMContentLoaded", function(event) {	if(window.jQuery) {		jQuery( document ).ready(function() {			if (jQuery(".bc_middle").hasClass("collapse")) {				jQuery(".bc_ellipse").click(function(){					jQuery(".bc_hide").toggleClass("visible");					jQuery(".bc_middle").toggle();					jQuery(".bc_ellipse").toggle();					jQuery(".bc_content").toggleClass("noflex");					jQuery(".block_breadcrumbs_content").toggleClass("noflex");				});				jQuery(".bc_hide").click(function(){					jQuery(".bc_hide").toggleClass("visible");					jQuery(".bc_middle").toggle();					jQuery(".bc_ellipse").toggle();					jQuery(".bc_content").toggleClass("noflex");					jQuery(".block_breadcrumbs_content").toggleClass("noflex");				});			} else {				jQuery(".bc_ellipse").hide();			}		});	}});																							2023 Country Reports on Human Rights Practices: Suriname																																					Bureau of Democracy, Human Rights, and Labor																																																																																							Download Report																																																							Translations																																																																 In this section										/																							EXECUTIVE SUMMARY																																													EXECUTIVE SUMMARY																															Section 1. Respect for the Integrity of the Person																																																									a. Arbitrary Deprivation of Life and Other Unlawful or Politically Motivated Killings																																																																											b. Disappearance																																																																											c. Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman, or Degrading Treatment or Punishment, and Other Related Abuses																																																																			Prison and Detention Center Conditions																																																																																																																		d. Arbitrary Arrest or Detention																																																																			Arrest Procedures and Treatment of Detainees																																																																																																																		e. Denial of Fair Public Trial																																																																			Trial Procedures																																																								Political Prisoners and Detainees																																																																																																																		f. Transnational Repression																																																																											g. Property Seizure and Restitution																																																																											h. Arbitrary or Unlawful Interference with Privacy, Family, Home, or Correspondence																																																																																	Section 2. Respect for Civil Liberties																																																									a. Freedom of Expression, Including for Members of the Press and Other Media																																																																			Internet Freedom																																																																																																																		b. Freedoms of Peaceful Assembly and Association																																																																											c. Freedom of Religion																																																																											d. Freedom of Movement and the Right to Leave the Country																																																																											e. Protection of Refugees																																																																											f. Status and Treatment of Internally Displaced Persons (IDPs)																																																																											g. Stateless Persons																																																																																	Section 3. Freedom to Participate in the Political Process																																																									Elections and Political Participation																																																																																	Section 4. Corruption in Government																															Section 5. Governmental Posture Towards International and Nongovernmental Monitoring and Investigation of Alleged Abuses of Human Rights																															Section 6. Discrimination and Societal Abuses																																																									Women																																																																											Systemic Racial or Ethnic Violence and Discrimination																																																																											Indigenous Peoples																																																																											Children																																																																											Antisemitism																																																																											Trafficking in Persons																																																																											Acts of Violence, Criminalization, and Other Abuses Based on Sexual Orientation, Gender Identity or Expression, or Sex Characteristics																																																																											Persons with Disabilities																																																																											Other Societal Violence or Discrimination																																																																																	Section 7. Worker Rights																																																									a. Freedom of Association and the Right to Collective Bargaining																																																																											b. Prohibition of Forced or Compulsory Labor																																																																											c. Prohibition of Child Labor and Minimum Age for Employment																																																																											d. Discrimination (see section 6)																																																																											e. Acceptable Conditions of Work																																																																																																							EXECUTIVE SUMMARY				There were no significant changes in the human rights situation in Suriname during the year.Significant human rights issues included credible reports of:  inhuman or degrading treatment of detainees by government authorities; serious restrictions on freedom of expression in the form of criminal libel laws; serious government corruption; and the existence of some of the worst forms of child labor.The government took credible steps to identify and punish officials who may have committed human rights abuses.																														Section 1.													 Respect for the Integrity of the Person												    																																																a. Arbitrary Deprivation of Life and Other Unlawful or Politically Motivated Killings										There were no reports that the government or its agents committed arbitrary or unlawful killings, including extrajudicial killings, during the year.On December 20, the Appellate Chamber of the Court of Justice upheld the guilty verdict of former President Desire Bouterse and affirmed his 20-year prison sentence for the extrajudicial killing of 15 political opponents in 1982.  The chamber also affirmed the convictions and 15-year prison sentences of codefendants Bennie Brondenstein, Ernst Gefferie, and Iwan Dijksteel.  In addition, the chamber affirmed the conviction of codefendant Stephanus Dendoe and increased his sentence from 10 years’ imprisonment to 15 years’ imprisonment.																																				b. Disappearance										There were no reports of disappearances by or on behalf of government authorities.																																				c. Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman, or Degrading Treatment or Punishment, and Other Related Abuses										While the law prohibited such practices, there were multiple reports of mistreatment, beatings, and unnecessary use of force during arrests and detention.  Authorities initiated criminal proceedings against police officers, prison guards, and other security forces accused of such practices.  One police officer was convicted in August and sentenced to 12 months prison, of which 10 months and three weeks were conditional, with two years’ probation for beating detainees during two separate arrests.																Prison and Detention Center Conditions						Prison conditions generally met minimum international standards, but there were numerous problems in the country’s 21 detention centers.Abusive Physical Conditions:  There were no significant reports regarding prison center conditions that raised human rights concerns.  Nonetheless, observers noted aging prisons required upgrades and were understaffed.  Facilities lacked adequate emergency exits.  Cells had individual padlocks.  Some persons in pretrial detention were housed with convicts.Overcrowding was a problem in the detention centers.  Older buildings had inadequate lighting, poor ventilation and sanitation, and occasional flooding.  Police had no standard operating procedures to manage detention facilities.  Police officers were assigned to detention facilities without any specialized training.  Facilities lacked an adequate number of guards, relying instead on regular-duty police when additional assistance was necessary.  Lawyers reported on multiple occasions that their clients were denied access to medical care while in detention.Administration:  Authorities investigated credible allegations of mistreatment.Independent Monitoring:  The government permitted monitoring visits by independent human rights observers.																										d. Arbitrary Arrest or Detention										The law prohibited arbitrary arrest and detention and provided for the right of any person to challenge the lawfulness of their arrest or detention in court.  The government generally observed these requirements.																Arrest Procedures and Treatment of Detainees						Police apprehended individuals with warrants based on sufficient evidence and brought them before an independent judiciary.  The law required that detainees be brought before a judge within seven days to determine the legality of their arrest, and courts generally met the deadline.  An assistant district attorney or a police inspector was required to authorize incommunicado detention.  If additional time was needed to investigate a charge, a judge could extend the detention period in 30-day increments up to a total of 150 days.  There was no bail system.  Release pending trial depended on the type of crime committed and the judge handling the case.  Detainees received prompt access to counsel of their choosing, but the prosecutor could prohibit access if the prosecutor believed access could harm the investigation.  Legal counsel was provided at no charge for indigent detainees.  Detainees were allowed weekly visits from family members.Pretrial Detention:  Courts continued to experience delays, prolonging the detention of those awaiting trial.																										e. Denial of Fair Public Trial										The constitution provided for an independent judiciary, and the government generally respected judicial independence and impartiality.There were 31 judges in the country, short of the estimated 40 needed for proper functioning of the judicial system, and there was a significant backlog of cases.  Cases were postponed repeatedly, adding to the backlog.																Trial Procedures						The law provided for the right to a fair and public trial, and the judiciary generally enforced this right.The right to trial without undue delay was consistently under pressure due to lack of sufficient judges.  Most cases, particularly high-profile cases, were processed only once per month.  Additionally, cases were delayed due to insufficient administrative staff and technical expertise in judicial investigation.  Lawyers assigned to provide legal assistance to indigent detainees complained the government stipend did not cover their costs to defend these detainees, and they threatened to cease legal assistance.  Many cases requiring interpreters or psychologists were delayed due to lack of pay for these specialists.						Political Prisoners and Detainees						There were no reports of political prisoners or detainees.																										f. Transnational Repression										Not applicable.																																				g. Property Seizure and Restitution										Not applicable.																																				h. Arbitrary or Unlawful Interference with Privacy, Family, Home, or Correspondence										The law prohibited such actions, and there were no reports the government failed to respect these prohibitions.																																					Section 2.													 Respect for Civil Liberties												    																																																a. Freedom of Expression, Including for Members of the Press and Other Media										The constitution provided for freedom of expression, including for members of the press and other media.  While there were no formal restrictions on the press, actions by government and nongovernment actors impeded the ability of independent media to conduct their work.  High-ranking members of government publicly criticized media reporting.Freedom of Expression:  There were multiple arrests of persons who openly criticized government officials, primarily the president.  Some protest organizers were detained for questioning and released within days without being charged.  Human rights defenders argued these tactics were employed to deter criticism of the government.Libel/Slander Laws:  The country’s criminal defamation laws carried penalties for convictions, with prison terms from three months to seven years.  The harshest penalty was for expressing public enmity, hatred, or contempt towards the government.  Throughout the year, persons were detained on charges of insulting the president or other government officials or for showing contempt for the government.  None were convicted, and in most cases, persons were released without going before a judge.  Critics argued these detentions were intended to limit free speech and called for the laws to be revoked.																Internet Freedom						In general, there were no government restrictions on access to the internet.  Nevertheless, journalists, members of the political opposition, their supporters, and other independent entities alleged government interference with and unlawful oversight of email and social media accounts.  During riots in February, authorities restricted access to certain internet sites so that rioters could not share information, resulting in general restrictions on the internet for all.																										b. Freedoms of Peaceful Assembly and Association										The law provided for the freedoms of peaceful assembly and association.  The government required permits for groups to protest.  Some groups chose to protest without a permit.  In those instances, police instructed activists on permissible routes and blocked off certain areas to maintain public order.																																				c. Freedom of Religion										See the Department of State’s International Religious Freedom Report at  https://www.state.gov/religiousfreedomreport/.																																				d. Freedom of Movement and the Right to Leave the Country										The constitution provided for freedom of internal movement, foreign travel, emigration, and repatriation, and the government generally respected these rights.																																				e. Protection of Refugees										The government cooperated with the Office of the UN High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR) and other humanitarian organizations in providing protection and assistance to refugees, returning refugees, and asylum seekers, as well as other persons of concern.Access to Asylum:  The law provided for granting asylum or refugee status, and the government had a system for providing protection to refugees.  The country relied on UNHCR to register asylum seekers.																																				f. Status and Treatment of Internally Displaced Persons (IDPs)										Not applicable.																																				g. Stateless Persons										A 2014 amendment to the law automatically granted citizenship to a person born in the country if that person was not automatically eligible through the citizenship of one of the parents.  There were reported cases of children born after 2014 to non-Surinamese parents who were denied citizenship.  Children born prior to this amendment to undocumented parents were not eligible to receive citizenship until they turned 18.  There were reports of stateless children or children of foreign parents who faced problems registering in schools due to improper or incomplete documentation, including a birth certificate.																																					Section 3.													 Freedom to Participate in the Political Process												    																						The law provided citizens the ability to choose their government in free and fair periodic elections held by secret ballot and based on universal and equal suffrage.																										Elections and Political Participation										Abuses or Irregularities in Recent Elections:  National elections in 2020 were widely reported to be fair and free of abuses and irregularities.Political Parties and Political Participation:  The law prohibited political organizations from running on a combination ticket in elections, putting at a disadvantage smaller parties that sought to combine their strength to challenge larger parties.  Smaller parties and activists stated the registration fee for political parties to participate in elections was an attempt to create an additional burden for smaller or less wealthy parties to take part in the elections.In August 2022, the Constitutional Court ruled the electoral law unconstitutional on the grounds it violated the rule of equality and the principle of one person, one vote.  The court found that votes in rural, less populated districts outweighed those in urban, more populated areas, since it required far fewer votes to win a seat for the National Assembly in rural districts.  On October 13, the National Assembly passed an amendment to the electoral law, and October 16, an amendment to the constitution.  The two amendments addressed the court’s concerns by eliminating voting districts and creating one voting district for the entire country so each vote would count equally.																																					Section 4.													 Corruption in Government												    																						The law provided criminal penalties for corruption by officials, and the government implemented the law effectively at times.  There were numerous accusations from political opponents, civil society, and media that officials engaged in corrupt practices.The government undertook steps towards the full implementation of the 2017 anti-corruption law by installing the National Anti-Corruption Committee in May for prevention and early detection of potential corruptive practices at government entities.Corruption:  Practically every sector of government was accused of corruption.  Specific allegations were launched related to land title issuances, contracts for school transport, the sale of government property, and at state-owned companies, including the Suriname Postal Bank, the electricity company EBS, and Surinam Airways.The appeals process continued in the case of former Minister of Finance Gillmore Hoefdraad, who in 2021 was convicted of corruption, fraud, falsification, and money laundering, as well as taking part in a criminal organization.  He was sentenced to 12 years in prison and fined 500,000 Surinamese dollars ($16,000) in absentia.  His appeal was initially denied because he was absent during the proceedings, but the Court of Justice ruled it would allow the appeal to continue in accordance with international conventions.  Hoefdraad and his legal team argued the trial was politically motivated.The appeals processes continued for Hoefdraad’s accomplices – former Central Bank Governor Robert van Trikt, former Central Bank Director of Compliance Faranaaz Alibaks-Hausil, former Postal Bank Director Ginmardo Kromosoeto, and van Trikt’s business partner Ashween Angnoe.Former Vice President Ashwin Adhin, who was on trial for alleged destruction and misappropriation of government property, was acquitted of all charges; the judge found there was insufficient evidence to prove guilt.Multiple investigations of alleged corruption filed against members of the previous and sitting government continued.  The attorney general stated investigations were often prolonged while her office waited for documentation.  Government entities were often slow or nonresponsive to requests for information.For additional information concerning corruption in the country, please see the Department of State’s Investment Climate Statement for the country, and the Department of State’s International Narcotics Control Strategy Report, which includes information on financial crimes.																											Section 5.													 Governmental Posture Towards International and Nongovernmental Monitoring and Investigation of Alleged Abuses of Human Rights												    																						Several independent domestic human rights groups operated without government restriction to monitor and investigate human rights conditions or cases and publish their findings.  Government officials were often cooperative, although officials were not always responsive to the views of these groups.Government Human Rights Bodies:  The Human Rights Office of the Ministry of Justice and Police advised the government on regional and international proceedings against the state concerning human rights.  It also prepared the state’s response to various international human rights reports.  Its effectiveness and independence were limited, since it was under executive branch control.  It did not solicit or investigate public complaints.  The legislative branch and the president’s cabinet maintained their own human rights commissions.																											Section 6.													 Discrimination and Societal Abuses												    																																																Women										Rape and Domestic Violence:  The law criminalized rape of women and men, including spousal rape and domestic or intimate partner rape and other forms of domestic and sexual violence.  The law did not specify so-called corrective rape of lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, queer, or intersex (LGBTQI+) persons.  The law prescribed penalties for rape or forcible sexual assault of 12 to 15 years’ imprisonment and a substantial fine.  The government enforced the law effectively.Gender-based violence remained a serious and pervasive problem.  The law imposed sentences of four to eight years’ imprisonment for domestic violence.  Government institutions collaborated with nongovernmental organizations (NGOs) and international organizations to raise awareness and prevent domestic violence and other forms of gender-based violence.  They also evaluated the legislation and procedures used in addressing cases related to gender-based violence and domestic violence and made recommendations.  They trained police, health workers, and social workers, among others, to identify and handle cases of domestic and gender-based violence.Two shelters offered women survivors and their children temporary housing; one was managed through the government’s Victim Assistance Bureau of the Ministry of Justice and Police, and the second by an NGO.Other Forms of Gender-based Violence or Harassment:  The law provided protection for workers against harassment in the private sector.  The law was not applicable to civil servants, who accounted for the largest group in the workforce.Stalking was a criminal offense, and police could investigate possible cases of stalking without a formal complaint.  Pending investigation, police could issue temporary restraining orders limiting contact between the victim and suspect for up to 30 days.  If found guilty, offenders could receive prison sentences ranging from four to 12 years and a large fine.Discrimination:  The law provided for a woman’s right to equal access to education, employment, and property.  The government did not always enforce the law effectively.  Women experienced discrimination in access to employment and in rates of pay for the same or substantially similar work as men.  No law prohibited gender discrimination for access to credit.Reproductive Rights:  There were no reports of coerced abortion or involuntary sterilization on the part of government authorities.Survivors of sexual violence had access to government-supported health insurance that arranged services for sexual and reproductive health.  Emergency contraception and postexposure prophylaxis in cases of rape were available during medical treatment of the survivor.  Survivors requested assistance either through the Ministry of Social Affairs, which was primarily responsible for issuing government-supported health insurance, or through the Bureau of Victim Care in the Ministry of Justice and Police, which provided counseling and health-care assistance to survivors.The adolescent birth rate for girls ages 15 to 19 was 56 per 1,000 in 2021.  There was a high rate of adolescent pregnancy in low-income city neighborhoods and in the interior of the country.  Most individuals in this age group claimed to have an unmet need for comprehensive sexual education.  These pregnancies often led girls to drop out of school.																																				Systemic Racial or Ethnic Violence and Discrimination										The law stated every person had equal rights to the protection of person and goods.  It further stated no persons could be discriminated against based on their race, language, or national descent.  The government enforced the law effectively.While there were no reported cases of governmental or societal violence against members of racial, ethnic, or national minorities, there was an increase in racial discrimination and ethnically focused messaging on social media, according to civil society organizations.																																				Indigenous Peoples										The law afforded no special protection for, nor recognition of, Indigenous persons.  The Inter-American Commission on Human Rights identified the Maroons (descendants of enslaved individuals who escaped, fled to the interior, and established free communities, approximately 22 percent of the population) as tribal peoples and thus entitled to the same rights as the Indigenous Amerindian communities (approximately 4 percent of the population).Maroons and Amerindians living in the remote and undeveloped interior had limited access to education, employment, and health and social services.  Both groups participated in decisions affecting their sacred and ancestral traditions and cultures but ultimately had little or no influence in decisions affecting exploitation of energy, minerals, timber, or other natural resources on their traditional lands.There was no effective demarcation of Maroon lands.  Authorities issued titles to third parties for land where Amerindians lived or that Amerindians considered to be part of their traditional lands without consulting all stakeholders.  They also granted permits and allowed logging and mining on Amerindian and Maroon lands.  Organizations representing these communities complained that small-scale mining operations, mainly by illegal gold miners, and logging activities cut residents off from their agricultural land, which often was connected to sacred cosmovisions, and threatened to drive these communities away from their traditional settlements and ways of life.  Mercury runoff from mining activities and riverbank erosion contaminated drinking water and threatened traditional foods sources, especially freshwater fish.Maroon and Amerindian groups repeatedly petitioned the government and National Assembly for recognition of their lands and demanded the government cease issuing titles to third party developers.  They further demanded that the government implement the rulings of the Inter-American Court on Human Rights in the 2008 case of the Saramaka People v. Suriname and the 2015 ruling of the Kalina and Lokono Peoples v. Suriname.  Frustration regarding a lack of response from the government was said to have culminated in an attack on government facilities and private property in May, resulting in the death of two villagers.																																				Children										Child Abuse:  The law prohibited child abuse, but the government did not enforce the law effectively.  Children suffered a high rate of physical and mental abuse.  According to the most recent (2018) UNICEF Multiple Indicator Cluster Survey, 88 percent of children ages two to 14 suffered either physical or mental abuse.  In rural areas, the rate was even higher, at 92 percent.  A 2022 study showed that while an estimated 70,000 children encountered some form of abuse each year, only 400 cases were reported.To avoid intimidation by perpetrators, children could testify in special chambers at legal proceedings.  The Youth Affairs Office continued to raise awareness regarding sexual abuse, drugs, and alcohol through a weekly television program.  The Youth Support Hotline, which received government support, maintained a 24-hour service and social media presence.  The hotline provided children confidential advice and aid.  UNICEF trained government officials on children’s rights.  The Ministry of Justice and Police operated three child protection centers in different parts of the country.With the support of UNICEF, the Academic Hospital Paramaribo maintained a social pediatric unit for abused children.  The unit provided child victims of abuse with medical, social, and psychological guidance and worked with authorities to identify abusers.Child, Early, and Forced Marriage:  Parental permission to marry was required until the age of 21.  The marriage law set the minimum age of marriage at 15 for girls and 17 for boys, provided parents of the parties agreed to the marriage.  Children in certain tribal communities often married at an age younger than that set by the law.  The government did not enforce the law effectively.Sexual Exploitation of Children:  The law prohibited the grooming, use of children for commercial sexual exploitation, including sex trafficking, the sale of children, offering or procuring a child for commercial child sexual exploitation, and practices related to child pornography.  Authorities investigated all reported abuses.  While the legal age of sexual consent was 14, the law prohibited the sexual exploitation of a person younger than 18.  Criminal law penalized persons responsible for recruiting children into commercial sex and provided penalties of up to six years’ imprisonment and a significant fine.  The law also prohibited child pornography, which carried a maximum penalty of six years’ imprisonment and a fine.  Lack of economic opportunities led to an increasing number of adolescent children trafficked for sex, sometimes by their parents, to support the family or to pay for education.  One NGO reported commercial sexual exploitation of children as young as 14.																																				Antisemitism										There was a Jewish community of approximately 100 persons.  There were no reports of antisemitic incidents or discrimination.																																				Trafficking in Persons										See the Department of State’s Trafficking in Persons Report at  https://www.state.gov/trafficking-in-persons-report/.																																				Acts of Violence, Criminalization, and Other Abuses Based on Sexual Orientation, Gender Identity or Expression, or Sex Characteristics										Criminalization:  There were no laws that criminalized consensual same-sex sexual conduct.  There were no reports of seemingly neutral laws being applied disproportionally to LGBTQI+ persons.Violence and Harassment:  Activists stated there were few official reports of violence against LGBTQI+ persons, primarily due to fear of retribution.  Authorities investigated and prosecuted reported cases of violence against LGBTQI+ persons, but the LGBTQI+ community alleged authorities did not take all complaints filed by the LGBTQI+ persons seriously.Discrimination:  The law prohibited discrimination and hate speech based on sexual orientation, specifically protecting the LGBTQI+ community.  Violations were punishable by a fine or prison sentence of up to one year.  The law did not set standards for determining what constituted such discrimination or hate speech.  Same-sex couples could not marry, since the civil code recognized only marriages between a man and a woman.  In January, the Constitutional Court upheld the existing law.  The law on retirement benefits specifically excluded same-sex couples from benefits granted to heterosexual couples.  There were reports that members of the LGBTQI+ community faced discrimination in housing and employment.Within the LGBTQI+ community, the transgender community faced the greatest stigmatization and discrimination.  Societal discrimination varied depending on location, as discrimination in rural districts was far more pervasive than in the city.  In certain communities, young persons also experienced discrimination when coming out.Availability of Legal Gender Recognition:  A 2022 court ruling ordered the Civil Registration Office to register the name and gender change of a transgender person in the country’s official registry.  While the ruling set a precedent, changes to the official registries could be implemented only through amendment of the civil code, which did not occur during the year.Involuntary or Coercive Medical or Psychological Practices:  There were no reported cases of so-called conversion therapy to change a person’s sexual orientation or gender identity or expression, nor were there reports of medically unnecessary and irreversible “normalization” surgeries performed on children or on nonconsenting adult intersex persons.Restrictions of Freedom of Expression, Association, or Peaceful Assembly:  There were no legal restrictions on freedom of expression, association, or peaceful assembly related to LGBTQI+ matters.																																				Persons with Disabilities										No laws specifically prohibited discrimination against persons with physical or mental disabilities.  No law or program required access to buildings for persons with disabilities.  There was also no law that required government information and communication to be provided in accessible formats.  Persons with disabilities were eligible to receive general health benefits, but the process was often cumbersome.  Access to other government services was also difficult and often inadequate to meet the needs of persons with disabilities.  Persons with disabilities experienced discrimination when applying for jobs and services.  A judge could rule to deny a person with a cognitive disability the right to vote, to take part in business transactions, or to sign legal agreements.Children with disabilities attended school at a far lower rate than their peers without a disability.  There was secondary and technical education for deaf and hard-of-hearing persons, but not for those with visual disabilities.  The Foundation for the Blind taught braille and life skills to persons with low vision.																																				Other Societal Violence or Discrimination										Persons with HIV and AIDS experienced discrimination in employment, housing, and medical services.  Medical treatment was free for persons with HIV or AIDS covered under government insurance, but private insurers did not cover such treatment.  NGOs reported discriminatory testing and subsequent denial of assistance for persons with HIV or AIDS who applied for housing assistance from the Ministry of Social Affairs.																																					Section 7.													 Worker Rights												    																																																a. Freedom of Association and the Right to Collective Bargaining										The law provided for the right of workers to form and join unions of their choice without previous authorization or excessive requirements, the right to bargain collectively, and the right to strike.  The law prohibited antiunion discrimination, required that workers terminated for union activity be reinstated, and prohibited employer interference in union activities.  Labor laws did not cover undocumented foreign workers.The government effectively enforced applicable laws involving the private sector.  Penalties were commensurate with those for other laws involving denials of civil rights, such as discrimination, and penalties were sometimes applied against violators.In isolated cases, private employers refused to bargain under or recognize collective bargaining rights, but the unions usually pressured the employers to negotiate.  There were some reports that companies exploited legislative gaps and hired more contract employees than direct-hire staff to perform core business functions to cut costs.The government itself (the largest employer in the country) was not bound by these laws, since it deemed labor laws applied only to private employees, not civil servants.																																				b. Prohibition of Forced or Compulsory Labor										See the Department of State’s annual Trafficking in Persons Report at  https://www.state.gov/trafficking-in-persons-report/.																																				c. Prohibition of Child Labor and Minimum Age for Employment										See the Department of Labor’s Findings on the Worst Forms of Child Labor at  https://www.dol.gov/agencies/ilab/resources/reports/child-labor/findings/&nbsp;.																																				d. Discrimination (see section 6)																																														e. Acceptable Conditions of Work										Wage and Hour Laws:  The law provided for a national minimum wage that was above the poverty income level.  In the private sector, most unions were able to negotiate wage increases.  The National Wage Council, which included representatives from the government, employers, and unions, annually advised the government on a minimum hourly wage.Work above 45 hours per week on a regular basis required government permission, which was routinely granted.  The law required premium pay for such overtime work, prohibited excessive overtime, required a 24-hour rest period per week, and stipulated paid annual holidays.  Overtime was generally limited to four hours per day, for a maximum 12-hour workday.  During the holiday seasons, the retail sector had a blanket permit allowing for work up to 15 hours a day, including seven hours of overtime per week.Occupational Safety and Health:  The government set occupational safety and health (OSH) standards that generally were current and appropriate for the main industries in the country.  OSH experts did not actively identify unsafe conditions.  Larger employers had their own OSH staff, who set safety standards.  Workers in the formal sector could remove themselves from situations that endangered health or safety without jeopardy to their employment, and authorities effectively protected employees in this situation.  Workers in the informal sector were not able to remove themselves from these situations without risk to their employment.The International Labor Organization noted an increasing number of serious or fatal occupational accidents.  Most fatal occupational accidents were in the mining sector.  Workers in the informal sector, particularly in small-scale mining, often were exposed to dangerous conditions and hazardous substances such as mercury.Wage, Hour, and OSH Enforcement:  Inspectors in the Occupational Health and Safety Division in the Ministry of Labor did not effectively enforce wage, hour, and OSH laws.  Penalties for violations of relevant labor laws were commensurate with similar crimes, but those penalties were not always applied against violators.The number of labor inspectors was not sufficient to enforce compliance with labor laws.  Inspectors had the authority to make unannounced inspections and initiate sanctions.Reliable information was not available, but observers estimated 15 percent of the working-age population worked in the informal economy, where there was limited enforcement of labor laws.  In some areas, particularly the interior of the country, enforcement was nonexistent.																																				    							View report by:																				Afghanistan											Albania											Algeria											Andorra											Angola											Antigua and Barbuda											Argentina											Armenia											Australia											Austria											Azerbaijan											Bahrain											Bangladesh											Barbados											Belarus											Belgium											Belize											Benin											Bhutan											Bolivia											Bosnia and Herzegovina											Botswana											Brazil											Brunei											Bulgaria											Burkina Faso											Burma											Burundi											Cabo Verde											Cambodia											Cameroon											Canada											Central African Republic											Chad											Chile											China (Includes Hong Kong, Macau, and Tibet)											Colombia											Comoros											Costa Rica											Côte d&#8217;Ivoire											Croatia											Cuba											Cyprus											Czech Republic											Democratic Republic of the Congo											Denmark											Djibouti											Dominica											Dominican Republic											Ecuador											Egypt											El Salvador											Equatorial Guinea											Eritrea											Estonia											Eswatini											Ethiopia											Fiji											Finland											France											Gabon											Georgia											Germany											Ghana											Greece											Grenada											Guatemala											Guinea											Guinea-Bissau											Guyana											Haiti											Honduras											Hungary											Iceland											India											Indonesia											Iran											Iraq											Ireland											Israel, West Bank and Gaza											Italy											Jamaica											Japan											Jordan											Kazakhstan											Kenya											Kiribati											Kosovo											Kuwait											Kyrgyz Republic											Laos											Latvia											Lebanon											Lesotho											Liberia											Libya											Liechtenstein											Lithuania											Luxembourg											Madagascar											Malawi											Malaysia											Maldives											Mali											Malta											Marshall Islands											Mauritania											Mauritius											Mexico											Micronesia											Moldova											Monaco											Mongolia											Montenegro											Morocco											Mozambique											Namibia											Nauru											Nepal											New Zealand											Nicaragua											Niger											Nigeria											North Korea											North Macedonia											Norway											Oman											Pakistan											Palau											Panama											Papua New Guinea											Paraguay											Peru											Philippines											Poland											Portugal											Qatar											Republic of the Congo											Romania											Russia											Rwanda											Saint Kitts and Nevis											Saint Lucia											Saint Vincent and the Grenadines											Samoa											San Marino											Sao Tome and Principe											Saudi Arabia											Senegal											Serbia											Seychelles											Sierra Leone											Singapore											Slovakia											Slovenia											Solomon Islands											Somalia											South Africa											South Korea											South Sudan											Spain											Sri Lanka											Sudan											Suriname											Sweden											Switzerland											Syria											Taiwan											Tajikistan											Tanzania											Thailand											The Gambia											The Netherlands											Timor-Leste											Togo											The Bahamas											Tonga											Trinidad and Tobago											Tunisia											Turkey (Türkiye)											Turkmenistan											Tuvalu											Uganda											Ukraine											United Arab Emirates											United Kingdom											Uruguay											Uzbekistan											Vanuatu											Venezuela											Vietnam											Yemen											Zambia											Zimbabwe															Build A Custom Report																						On This Page				search													>																										EXECUTIVE SUMMARY																Section 1. Respect for the Integrity of the Person																																							a. Arbitrary Deprivation of Life and Other Unlawful or Politically Motivated Killings																																																						b. Disappearance																																																						c. Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman, or Degrading Treatment or Punishment, and Other Related Abuses																																																				Prison and Detention Center Conditions																																																																																				d. Arbitrary Arrest or Detention																																																				Arrest Procedures and Treatment of Detainees																																																																																				e. Denial of Fair Public Trial																																																				Trial Procedures																																												Political Prisoners and Detainees																																																																																				f. Transnational Repression																																																						g. Property Seizure and Restitution																																																						h. Arbitrary or Unlawful Interference with Privacy, Family, Home, or Correspondence																																																			Section 2. Respect for Civil Liberties																																							a. Freedom of Expression, Including for Members of the Press and Other Media																																																				Internet Freedom																																																																																				b. Freedoms of Peaceful Assembly and Association																																																						c. Freedom of Religion																																																						d. Freedom of Movement and the Right to Leave the Country																																																						e. Protection of Refugees																																																						f. Status and Treatment of Internally Displaced Persons (IDPs)																																																						g. Stateless Persons																																																			Section 3. Freedom to Participate in the Political Process																																							Elections and Political Participation																																																			Section 4. Corruption in Government																Section 5. Governmental Posture Towards International and Nongovernmental Monitoring and Investigation of Alleged Abuses of Human Rights																Section 6. Discrimination and Societal Abuses																																							Women																																																						Systemic Racial or Ethnic Violence and Discrimination																																																						Indigenous Peoples																																																						Children																																																						Antisemitism																																																						Trafficking in Persons																																																						Acts of Violence, Criminalization, and Other Abuses Based on Sexual Orientation, Gender Identity or Expression, or Sex Characteristics																																																						Persons with Disabilities																																																						Other Societal Violence or Discrimination																																																			Section 7. Worker Rights																																							a. Freedom of Association and the Right to Collective Bargaining																																																						b. Prohibition of Forced or Compulsory Labor																																																						c. Prohibition of Child Labor and Minimum Age for Employment																																																						d. Discrimination (see section 6)																																																						e. Acceptable Conditions of Work																																																									Tags																					Bureau of Democracy, Human Rights, and Labor																								Bureau of Western Hemisphere Affairs																								Suriname
- Designations of Former Surinamese President Desiré Delano Bouterse and Six Former Surinamese Military Officials Due to Involvement in Gross Violations of Human Rights HomeOffice of the SpokespersonPress Releases&#8230;Designations of Former Surinamese President Desiré Delano Bouterse and Six Former Surinamese Military Officials Due to Involvement in Gross Violations of Human Rights				hide		if(window.jQuery) {		jQuery( document ).ready(function() {			if (jQuery(".bc_middle").hasClass("collapse")) {				jQuery(".bc_ellipse").click(function(){					jQuery(".bc_hide").toggleClass("visible");					jQuery(".bc_middle").toggle();					jQuery(".bc_ellipse").toggle();					jQuery(".bc_content").toggleClass("noflex");					jQuery(".block_breadcrumbs_content").toggleClass("noflex");				});				jQuery(".bc_hide").click(function(){					jQuery(".bc_hide").toggleClass("visible");					jQuery(".bc_middle").toggle();					jQuery(".bc_ellipse").toggle();					jQuery(".bc_content").toggleClass("noflex");					jQuery(".block_breadcrumbs_content").toggleClass("noflex");				});			} else {				jQuery(".bc_ellipse").hide();			}		});	}																										Designations of Former Surinamese President Desiré Delano Bouterse and Six Former Surinamese Military Officials Due to Involvement in Gross Violations of Human Rights																																		Press Statement																														April 12, 2024																																							The United States is today announcing the designations of former Surinamese President Bouterse and six former Surinamese military officials: Benny Brondenstein, Stephanus Marinus Dendoe, Iwan Dijksteel, Ernst Gefferie, Kenneth Kempes, and Lucien Lewis pursuant to Section 7031(c) of the Department of State, Foreign Operations, and Related Programs Appropriations Act, due to their involvement in extrajudicial killings of political opponents during the “December Murders” of 1982.  These individuals and four family members are generally ineligible for entry into the United States.The United States commends Suriname for its commitment to the rule of law, including its effort to maintain judicial independence and combat official impunity.  As Secretary Blinken has noted, ending impunity is one of the best ways to prevent future abuses.  The strength of Suriname’s judicial institutions demonstrates the value of the rule of law as a critical pillar in the preservation of democracy and protection of human rights.						Tags																													7031(c)																															Bureau of Democracy, Human Rights, and Labor																								Bureau of Western Hemisphere Affairs																																														Human Rights and Democracy																															Office of the Spokesperson																								Suriname
- Economic and Health Dialogue of the Americas High-level Meeting Outcomes for 2024 Office of the SpokespersonThe Economic and Health Dialogue of the Americas (EHA) was launched on the margins of the 9th Summit of the Americas in June 2022 by the U.S. Department of State. In 2023, the EHA held its first high-level meeting to establish the governance structure and approve scope of work. Since then, countries have organized 11 technical meetings and a first in person encounter in Uruguay at the end of 2023.On the 11th of March of 2024, the 2nd annual high-level meeting of the EHA was held in the Dominican Republic with representation from 17 countries. Ministers and Vice Ministers from health, finance, economy, foreign affairs, and commerce agencies participated to include Ministerial-level participation from of the United States, Dominican Republic, Uruguay, Mexico, Bahamas, Costa Rica, Guyana, Guatemala, Suriname, Panama, Colombia, and Paraguay, in addition to high-level representatives from Brazil, Chile, Argentina, and Ecuador. In addition to government representatives, leadership from regional technical organizations participated, including IDB Executive Vice President Jordan Schwartz and PAHO Deputy Director Mary Lou Valdez. Representatives from ECLAC, USAID, USTDA, U.S. Department of Commerce, and CDC were also in attendance.What were the main agreements and outcomes of the 2nd Annual EHA High-Level Meeting in the Dominican Republic?Countries reaffirmed EHA’s commitment to strengthen health systems and economic resilience to emergencies in the region. Paraguay, Uruguay, Bahamas, Argentina, Peru, Brazil, and Chile affirmed their commitment to co-lead EHA technical working groups. Panama was praised for their leadership as co-chair of EHA along with United States.PAHO announced the launch of their Public Finance Management tool. The tool will enable countries to conduct analysis of fiscal space for the health sector to support responsible spending as well as sustainable and equitable public health financing. PAHO has committed to the goal of two countries applying the tool in 2024-2025. Several countries expressed interest at the meeting. The work supports the “Smart Spending” workstream.PAHO committed to use the Essential Public Health Functions (EPHF) assessments from 14 countries to produce a policy document that would establish shared priorities and identify institutional capacity gaps across the region that will require future investment to fill, with a sub-regional focus on Caribbean countries. This work will support the workstream on Prioritization of Health Sector Transformation, which is led by the Bahamas. The Bahamas announced the completion of their EPHF assessment at the meeting.Brazil, Dominican Republic, and Chile committed to apply the IDB’s Maturity Assessment Tool (MAT) to measure the capacity of social protection systems to respond to emergencies. Countries like Colombia, Dominican Republic, and Paraguay outlined some of the best practices around social protection during COVID-19, as well as lessons learned from other sectors and emergency response scenarios. The goal for 2024 will be to explore potential regional agreements to coordinate increased preparedness and responsiveness to future crises in the region. This work supports workstream on Responsive Social Protection.EHA countries announced commitment to conduct a pharmaceutical mapping exercise and prepare a regional strategy for nearshoring of critical inputs and consumables. EHA members short-listed mRNA vaccines, monoclonal antibodies, and antimicrobials, including for malaria and tuberculosis, as priority products for the 2024-2025 analysis. The United States committed to support this analysis in coordination with co-leads Argentina and Peru. Argentina affirmed their commitment to conduct a regional Private-Public Partnership analysis. This work supports the Resilient Supply Chain workstream.USAID shared progress on the Americas Health Corps initiative, announcing the training of 120,000 healthcare workers in the region thus far.USAID also announced funding for a market analysis of the current capacity within the Latin America and Caribbean (LAC) region to produce or manufacture vaccine countermeasures for emerging threats, endemic diseases, and local priorities relevant to the regional market. The EHA platform committed to supporting the implementation of recommendations from the analysis.EHA members approved the work plan for 2024-2025 and committed to a mid-year high-level meeting to review progress.EHA members recognized the importance of digital health and utilization of technology in the public health system and proposed establishing a new EHA workstream on technology and health. The EHA Executive Technical Working Group will develop a scope of work for this proposed workstream with the goal of launching it in 2024.For further information, please contact E_Commmunications@state.gov, or visit the EHA website: https://www.iadb.org/en/home/economic-and-health-dialogue-americas .
- Joint Statement on Third U.S.-Suriname Strategic Dialogue Office of the SpokespersonThe text of the following statement was released by the Governments of the United States of America and the Republic of Suriname on the occasion of the Third U.S.-Suriname Strategic Dialogue.Begin text:In the spirit of strengthening bilateral relations, the United States and Suriname held the Third Strategic Dialogue on January 31 in Washington, DC.  Senior officials from both countries explored ways to promote inclusive growth, foster innovation, combat climate change, and collaborate on capacity building and training.  The dialogue underscored the urgent need to address the climate crisis, accelerate the clean energy transition, promote sustainable development, foster economic resilience, and strengthen democracy.  In the area of security cooperation, the United States and Suriname support completing negotiations on the Air Intercept Assistance Agreement.  Both sides discussed other options to enhance information sharing, including through a Mutual Legal Assistance Treaty and a Customs Mutual Assistance Agreement.The United States supports Suriname’s efforts to address shared security challenges, including transnational organized crime, narcotics and human trafficking, money laundering, and corruption by enhancing the capacity of police and security services, including through the Caribbean Basin Security Initiative (CBSI).  The United States commends Suriname for its endorsement of the Los Angeles Declaration on Migration and Protection; both sides reaffirmed their commitment to promote safe, orderly, and humane migration in the Americas.We welcome Suriname to the Partnership for Atlantic Cooperation, a White House priority launched in September 2023.  The Partnership is a platform for Atlantic coastal states to work together to address common challenges to realize interconnected goals of advancing a peaceful, stable, prosperous, open, safe, and cooperative Atlantic region, and promote a healthy, sustainable, and resilient Atlantic for generations to come.End text.
- Suriname HomeReportsBureau of Economic and Business Affairs2023 Investment Climate Statements&#8230;Suriname				hide	document.addEventListener("DOMContentLoaded", function(event) {	if(window.jQuery) {		jQuery( document ).ready(function() {			if (jQuery(".bc_middle").hasClass("collapse")) {				jQuery(".bc_ellipse").click(function(){					jQuery(".bc_hide").toggleClass("visible");					jQuery(".bc_middle").toggle();					jQuery(".bc_ellipse").toggle();					jQuery(".bc_content").toggleClass("noflex");					jQuery(".block_breadcrumbs_content").toggleClass("noflex");				});				jQuery(".bc_hide").click(function(){					jQuery(".bc_hide").toggleClass("visible");					jQuery(".bc_middle").toggle();					jQuery(".bc_ellipse").toggle();					jQuery(".bc_content").toggleClass("noflex");					jQuery(".block_breadcrumbs_content").toggleClass("noflex");				});			} else {				jQuery(".bc_ellipse").hide();			}		});	}});																							2023 Investment Climate Statements: Suriname																																																																																												 In this section										/																							EXECUTIVE SUMMARY																																													EXECUTIVE SUMMARY																															1. Openness To, and Restrictions Upon, Foreign Investment																																																									Policies Towards Foreign Direct Investment																																																																											Limits on Foreign Control and Right to Private Ownership and Establishment																																																																											Other Investment Policy Reviews																																																																											Business Facilitation																																																																											Outward Investment																																																																																	2. Bilateral Investment and Taxation Treaties																															3. Legal Regime																																																									Transparency of the Regulatory System																																																																			International Regulatory Considerations																																																								Legal System and Judicial Independence																																																																																																																		Laws and Regulations on Foreign Direct Investment																																																																											Competition and Antitrust Laws																																																																											Expropriation and Compensation																																																																											Dispute Settlement																																																																			ICSID Convention and New York Convention																																																								Dispute Settlement																																																								International Commercial Arbitration and Foreign Courts																																																																																																																		Bankruptcy Regulations																																																																																	4. Industrial Policies																																																									Investment Incentives																																																																											Foreign Trade Zones/Free Ports/Trade Facilitation																																																																											Performance and Data Localization Requirements																																																																																	5. Protection of Property Rights																																																									Real Property																																																																											Intellectual Property Rights																																																																																	6. Financial Sector																																																									Capital Markets and Portfolio Investment																																																																											Money and Banking System																																																																											Foreign Exchange and Remittances																																																																			Foreign Exchange																																																								Remittance Policies																																																																																																																		Sovereign Wealth Funds																																																																																	7. State-Owned Enterprises																																																									Privatization Program																																																																																	8. Responsible Business Conduct																																																									Additional Resources																																																																											Climate Issues																																																																																	9. Corruption																																																									Resources to Report Corruption																																																																																	10. Political and Security Environment																															11. Labor Policies and Practices																															12. U.S. International Development Finance Corporation (DFC), and Other Investment Insurance or Development Finance Programs																															13. Foreign Direct Investment Statistics																															14. Contact for More Information																																																					EXECUTIVE SUMMARY				The government of Suriname officially supports and encourages business development through local and foreign investment. The overall investment climate favors U.S. investors with experience working in developing countries. To attract foreign direct investment (FDI), authorities have planned to update institutional and legal frameworks to protect investors and eliminate restrictions regarding investment income transfers and control related FDI flows. However, the World Trade Organization’s 2019 Trade Policy Review concluded that Suriname’s investment regime has not changed since its last review in 2013.  The report states that the overall regime, particularly the approval of FDI, may be discretionary rather than rules based.The extractives sector has historically attracted significant FDI, but numerous factors negatively impact the investment climate. These factors include an unclear process for awarding concessions and public tenders, corruption, institutional capacity constraints, and a lack of overall transparency. In January 2020, Apache and Total announced a “significant oil discovery” off the coast of Suriname in block 58, followed by similar discoveries in April 2020, July 2020, January 2021, and February 2022. In December 2020, Malaysian national oil company Petronas and ExxonMobil announced a discovery of hydrocarbons in Suriname’s Block 52. The International Oil companies have delayed the anticipated 2022 Final Investment Decision citing that more time is needed for exploration after having encountered some unproductive wells in block 58. International oil companies continue to explore both near shore and offshore. U.S.-based Newmont Corporation and Canada-based IAMGOLD that sold its Suriname operation in October 2022 to PCR based Zijin Mining Group – are the two major multinational gold companies in Suriname. They continue to be the key players in Suriname’s gold mining sector, generating significant revenues for the government.Suriname’s economy has been in decline for the past eight years. To address this decline, the government developed an economic and recovery plan to deal with these serious economic conditions. After taking office in July 2020, President Chandrikapersad Santokhi’s administration opened negotiations with the International Monetary Fund to arrange a financial assistance package and began talks with international bondholders to restructure Suriname’s repayment schedule.On December 22, 2021, the International Monetary Fund (IMF) approved a 36-month, $688 million Extended Fund Facility (EFF) for Suriname. The EFF will support the government’s economic recovery plan to restore fiscal sustainability, bring public debt down to sustainable levels, upgrade the monetary and exchange rate policy framework, stabilize the financial system, and strengthen institutional capacity to tackle corruption and money laundering and improve governance.On March 23, 2022, Executive board of the IMF completed the first review of the arrangement under the Extended Fund Facility (EFF) for Suriname. The board’s decision allowed for an immediate disbursement of U$ 55 million. The IMF released a second tranche on March 23, 2022, but subsequent tranches have been indefinitely delayed.Since taking office, the Santokhi administration allowed the Surinamese dollar to float on the open market, raised taxes on fuel, increased prices for utilities, passed a new law on foreign currency, amended the State Debt Act to allow the government to take loans to address COVID-19, and began reforms of Suriname’s large civil service sector. The government implemented per January 01, 2023, a value-added tax. Suriname’s return to pre pandemic levels of economic activity will take longer because Russia’s invasion of Ukraine has impacted Suriname’s food security, caused supply chain disruptions, and led to inflation.Table 1: Key Metrics and RankingsMeasureYearIndex/RankWebsite AddressTI Corruption Perceptions Index202240 of 85http://www.transparency.org/research/cpi/overviewGlobal Innovation Index20xxN/Ahttps://www.globalinnovationindex.org/analysis-indicator   N/AU.S. FDI in partner country ($M USD, historical stock positions)20xxN/Ahttps://apps.bea.gov/international/factsheet/   N/AWorld Bank GNI per capita2021USD 4,410http://data.worldbank.org/indicator/NY.GNP.PCAP.CD																																					1. Openness To, and Restrictions Upon, Foreign Investment						    																																																Policies Towards Foreign Direct Investment										The Government of Suriname supports and encourages local and foreign investment to develop its economy. The overall investment climate favors U.S. investors with experience working in developing countries. Investment opportunities exist in the oil and gas sector, mining, agriculture, timber, fishing, financial technology, and tourism.Suriname has no sector-specific laws or practices that discriminate against foreign investors, including U.S. investors, by prohibiting, limiting, or conditioning foreign investment. The only exception is the petroleum sector. The state-owned oil company, Staatsolie, maintains sole ownership of all oil-related activities. Foreign investment is possible through exploration and production sharing contracts (PSCs) with Staatsolie. Four U.S. companies participate in PSCs as operators and/or contract partners.Suriname’s Investment and Trade Agency (SITA) is the national Trade and Investment Promotion Agency and is currently constituted as an independent state-owned company operating under the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, International Business, and International Corporation of Suriname. SITA’s goal is to act as a one-stop shop for foreign investors and exporters.Suriname does not have a formal business roundtable or ombudsman charged with investment retention or maintaining an ongoing dialogue with investors.																																				Limits on Foreign Control and Right to Private Ownership and Establishment										Foreign and domestic private entities can establish and own business enterprises and engage in all forms of remunerative activity. There have been no significant changes since last ICS.There are no general limits on foreign ownership or control – statutory, de facto, or otherwise.Except for the hydrocarbon sector, there are no sector-specific restrictions applied to foreign ownership and control. With hydrocarbons, the law limits ownership to Staatsolie, the state-owned oil company, which maintains sole ownership of all petroleum-related activities. No law requires outright prohibition on investment, equity caps, governance boards requirements, mandatory domestic joint venture partner, licensing restrictions, mandatory intellectual property technology transfer requirements local presence or workforce requirements. Discussions are being held about local content regarding the developments in the oil and gas sector, but this has not yet been enacted into legislation.Caribbean Single Market and Economy (CSME) countries do enjoy favored status over other sources of foreign investment, but in practice international firms from beyond the CSME are not denied investment opportunities. An Economic Partnership Agreement (EPA) with the European Union aims to provide European companies better access to Suriname. Suriname has not yet ratified the EPA.Government ministries screen inbound foreign investments intended for the sector of the economy that they oversee. Special commissions screen all necessary legal and financial documents. Screening criteria vary but are intended to determine a proposed investment’s compliance with local law. The screening process is neither public nor transparent and can be considered a barrier to investment. The Department of International Business at the Ministry of Foreign Affairs requests that prospective investors fill out an intake form. The intake form will enable its appraisal committee to conduct a quick scan and conclude whether the FDI in question fits the development goals of the government. In the near future Suriname’s Investment and Trade Agency will conduct the due diligence.																																				Other Investment Policy Reviews										The World Trade Organization (WTO) last conducted an investment policy review of Suriname in 2019. The Inter-American Development Bank published a report called Framework for Private Development in Suriname in 2013. The World Bank Group published Suriname Sector Competitiveness Analysis, focusing on the agribusiness and extractive sectors in 2017.There are no civil society organizations in the country that have provided useful reviews of investment policy-related concerns in the past five years.																																				Business Facilitation										The Santokhi administration has emphasized its desire to diversify Suriname’s economy and deepen business ties with the United States, Europe, and others. Since 2020, some ministries such as the Ministries of Public Works and Agriculture, Animal Husbandry and Fisheries began publishing public tenders on their websites. The government created a Presidential Commission on the Surinamese Diaspora to explore the possibilities of raising capital and increasing business ties with the Surinamese community in the Netherlands. In May 2021, the National Assembly approved a law to establish a State-owned investment company, Suriname Investment Enterprise NV. The MFA created an International Business Directorate to act as a first point of entry for foreign investors.There is no online business registration website. Companies must register with the local Chamber of Commerce and Industry, which provides guidance on registration procedures. At the time of registration, the company needs a local notary’s assent to ratify the company bylaws. For non-residents, the notary also sends a request to the Foreign Exchange Commission for approval. Applicants must obtain a tax number at the registration office of the tax department. Applications then go to the Ministry of Justice and Police and finally to the President for approval. The Ministry of Economic Affairs and Technological Innovation launched the Suriname Electronic Single Window (SESW) in September 2019. Online submission and processing of documents required for import, transit of goods, and export is now possible. The World Bank’s Doing Business report indicates starting a business requires 66 days. The local Chamber of Commerce and Industry states it can take as little as 30 days.																																				Outward Investment										The Government does not promote or incentivize outward investment. Suriname&#8217;s outward investment is minimal.Due to the small size of the local market, some domestic companies have expanded to CARICOM member states, such as Guyana and Trinidad and Tobago.																																												2. Bilateral Investment and Taxation Treaties						    																						There are no current ongoing negotiations regarding Bilateral Investment Treaty (BIT) nor Free Trade Agreements.Suriname has not signed a bilateral investment treaty with the United States. Suriname has signed a tax treaty with the Netherlands, which is also in force. Other signed, but not in force treaties, are with Indonesia, Cuba, Brazil, and United Arab Emirates.Suriname is not a member of the OECD Inclusive Framework on Base Erosion and Profit Shifting.																																		3. Legal Regime						    																																																Transparency of the Regulatory System										Suriname does not have transparent policies nor effective laws to foster competition. The previous National Assembly (2015-2020) indicated that it would vote on a draft competition law but did not do so. The Competitiveness Unit of Suriname coordinates and monitors national competitiveness and is working towards establishing policies and suggesting legislation to foster competition. Current legislation on topics such as taxes, the environment, health, safety, and other matters are not purposefully used to impede investment but may still form obstacles. Employment protection legislation is among the most stringent in the world. Labor laws, for instance, prohibit employers from firing an employee without the permission of the Ministry of Labor once the employee has fulfilled his or her probationary period, which by law is limited to two months. Tax laws are criticized for overburdening the formal business sector, while a large informal sector goes untaxed. Public sector contracts and concessions are not always awarded in a clear and transparent manner. The current administration has announced its commitment to greater transparency in the public tendering process, and the Ministry of Public Works is publishing procurement notices on its website on a regular basis.There are no informal regulatory processes managed by non-governmental organizations or private sector associations. Rule-making and regulatory authority exist within relevant ministries at the national level. It is this level of regulation that is most relevant for foreign businesses. The government may consult with relevant stakeholders on regulations, but there is no required public process. The government presents draft laws and regulations to the Council of Minsters for discussion and approval. Once approved, the President’s advisory body, the State Council, considers the draft. If approved, the government presents a draft to the National Assembly for discussion, amendment, and approval, and then to the President for signature. Legislation only goes into effect with the signature of the President and after publication in the National GazetteRule-making and regulatory authority exists within relevant ministries at the national level. It is this level of regulation that is most relevant for foreign businesses. The government may consult with relevant stakeholders on regulations, but there is no required public process. The government presents draft laws and regulations to the Council of Minsters for discussion and approval. Once approved, the President’s advisory body, the State Council, considers the draft. If approved, the government presents a draft to the National Assembly for discussion, amendment, and approval, and then to the President for signature. Legislation only goes into effect with the signature of the President and after publication in the National Gazette.Legal, regulatory, and accounting procedures are often outdated and therefore not transparent nor consistent with international norms. The National Assembly passed the Act on Annual Accounts in 2017 to create more fiscal transparency by requiring all companies, including state-owned enterprises, to publish annual accounts based on International Financial Reporting Standards (IFRS). The law went into effect in 2020 for large companies, while it went into effect for small and medium sized companies (SMEs) in 2021. Small companies can use the IFRS for SMEs. On October 27, 2022, The National Assembly approved an extension of one year to the Act of Annual Accounts, to give companies more time to publish reports according to IFRS. Furthermore, the upper limit of small companies has been raised from SRD 3 million to SRD 50 million net turnover per year.Suriname passed new legislation in October 2018 to professionalize and institute better standards in the accounting profession. The legislation created the Suriname Chartered Accountants Institute (SCAI) and makes membership mandatory for accountants in Suriname. The board of the SCAI has the responsibility to monitor the quality of the profession and apply disciplinary measures.The intake form used by the division of International Business at the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and International Cooperation does mention that companies can submit an Environmental and Social Impact Assessment (ESIA) if available.Draft bills or regulations are discussed in view of the public, and relevant stakeholders may be consulted. The National Assembly has established the email address feedbackwetgeving@dna.sr as a place where individuals can give their opinion on draft legislation.There is no centralized online location where key regulatory actions are published. However, the National Assembly publishes the actual text of adopted laws on its website.It is unclear what the regulatory enforcement mechanisms that ensure the government follows administrative processes might be, as the processes have not been made public. There is no public administration law. The Auditor General’s office is an independent body in charge of supervising the financial management of government funds. The Supreme Audit Institution reports to the National Assembly. The Central Accountant Service exercises control on administrative processes at the ministries and reports to the Ministry of Finance. There are no centralized online locations where key regulatory actions, or their summaries, are published.A new minimum wage law entered into force on March 01, 2023, setting the minimum wage at SRD 30 per hour and will be valid till June 2023. From June until December 2023, the minimum hour wage will be set at SRD 35.On August 31,2022 the value-added tax was approved in the National Assembly and implemented on January 01, 2023.The revised petroleum law entered into force on January 01, 2023.Tax facilities agreed before with the State Oil company are now incorporated in the revised petroleum Act. These are sales tax, stamp duty and dividend tax. Exemptions also apply for contractors and sub-contractors for goods and services exclusively related to the oil sector. The revision offers the sector more certainty.It is unclear what the regulatory enforcement mechanisms are, as the process has not been made public. Regulatory reform efforts announced in prior years have not been fully implemented. Regulations are developed by ministries that have jurisdiction over the relevant area, in consultation with stakeholders.The government’s executive budget proposal and enacted budget are easily accessible to the public. The government is obligated to share all financial data on the budget with the IMF before it can officially publish the data. This also applies to the public debt data. Full end-of-year budget reports are not published for the public to see what the government has actually accomplished from the enacted budget. However, the Ministry of Finance drafts end-of year budget reports for every fiscal year and have them validated by the Central Government Auditing Bureau (CLAD) and the Supreme Audit Institution and then send to the National Assembly for preparation of the public debates. The State Debt Management Office (SDMO) is responsible for the operational management of the public debt of the government. Data regarding public debt is published every three months in the Government Gazette of Suriname and on the SDMO website.																International Regulatory Considerations						As a member of CARICOM, Suriname has committed to regionally coordinated regulatory systems.Suriname uses national and international standards. Standards developed by international and regional standardization bodies include ISO, Codex Alimentarius, International Electro Technical Commission, CROSQ, ASTM International, COPANT, SMIIC (Standards and Metrology Institute for Islamic Countries), NEN (Nederland Normalisatie Instituut), ETSI, GLOBAL GAP, Standards and Metrology Institute for Islamic Countries (SMIIC) etc.Suriname is a member of the World Trade Organization (WTO). The WTO Committee on Technical Barriers to Trade (TBT) lists only one notification from Suriname in 2015.						Legal System and Judicial Independence						Suriname’s legal system is based on the Dutch civil system. Judges uphold the sanctity of contracts and enforce them in accordance with their terms. When an individual or company disputes a signed contract, they have the right to take the case to court. The judiciary consistently upholds local law, applies it, and enforces it for local and international businesses.Laws are defined in criminal, civil, and commercial codes, and verdicts are based on the judge’s interpretation of those codes. There is no specialized commercial or civil court. The commercial codes contain commercial legislation.Historically, the judicial system has been considered independent of the executive branch. Most observers consider the judicial system to be procedurally competent, fair, reliable, and free of overt government interference. Due to a shortage of judges and administrative staff, processing of civil cases can be delayed. Last year, the Court of Justice appointed seven new judges to ease the delay in court cases. There are now 30 judges.Draft regulations may be reviewed by interested stakeholders, and they may be given the opportunity to comment. Since October 2019, individuals have also had the option to comment on draft legislation via email at feedbackwetgeving@dna.sr. There is no formal, required public consultation process. Suriname has no general administrative law, so there are no special administrative tribunals. Judges of the regular courts also hear cases of administrative law.																										Laws and Regulations on Foreign Direct Investment										The overall legal regime, and more particularly the approval of foreign direct investment (FDI), may be discretionary rather than rules based. This can lead to heightened unpredictability and uncertainty and associated risks of favoritism and corruption.On November 10, 2022, Suriname ratified the New York Convention of June 10, 1958. The convention is widely recognized as fundamental instrument of international arbitration and requires courts of contracting states to give effect to an arbitration agreement when a claim is brought in a matter covered by arbitration agreement. Contracting states are also required to recognize and enforce arbitration awards granted by other states, subject to specific limited exceptions.In February 2021, the Foreign Exchange Commission announced three new measures regarding exchange rate policy. First, exporters are now required to repatriate earned export revenues to Suriname, which requires a buyer abroad to pay for purchased goods through a Surinamese commercial bank. Second, exporters and foreign exchange offices must exchange 30% of their foreign currency income into Surinamese Dollars (SRD). Third, importers are required to pay for imports via Surinamese commercial banks.Several criminal investigations of former government officials began in 2020. In February 2020, former Central Bank Governor Robert van Trikt was arrested on fraud charges. In August 2020, the new National Assembly officially indicted ex-Minister of Finance Gillmore Hoefdraad, which allowed the Attorney General to launch an investigation into alleged financial mismanagement by Hoefdraad in collaboration with the ex-Governor of the Central Bank of Suriname, Robert van Trikt. In December 2020, the National Assembly voted to indict former Vice President (and current National Assembly member) Ashwin Adhin, which allowed the Attorney General to pursue a criminal investigation for embezzlement, fraud, and destruction of government property. In January 2022, both Hoefdraad and van Trikt were sentenced to twelve and eight years in prison respectively.There is no one-stop-shop website for investment that provides relevant laws, rules, procedures, and reporting requirements for investors. This will change once the website of Suriname’s Trade and Investment Agency is launched.																																				Competition and Antitrust Laws										There are no domestic agencies currently reviewing transactions for competition-related concerns. The previous National Assembly (2015-2020) considered draft laws on competition and consumer protection but did not ultimately vote on them. According to the authorities, no date for enactment is foreseen. Both draft laws also cover state-owned enterprises. The CARICOM Competition Commission is based in Suriname, and it monitors potential anti-competitive practices for enterprises operating within the CARICOM Single Market and Economy.																																				Expropriation and Compensation										According to Article 34 of Suriname’s constitution, expropriation will take place “only for reasons of public utility” and with prior compensation. In practice, the government has no history of expropriations. However, Article 42 of Suriname’s constitution specifically refers to all natural resources as property of the nation, and states that the nation has inalienable rights to take possession of all natural resources to utilize them for the economic, social, and cultural development of Suriname.There is no history of government measures alleged to be, or that could be argued to be, indirect expropriation, such as confiscatory tax regimes or regulatory actions that deprive investors of substantial economic benefits from their investments.There has been no alleged measures taken by the government, or could be argued to be, indirect expropriation, such as confiscatory tax regimes or regulatory actions that deprive investors of substantial economic benefits from their investments.																																				Dispute Settlement																										ICSID Convention and New York Convention						Suriname is not a party to the Convention on the Settlement of Investment Disputes between States and Nationals of other States (ICSID). Suriname has been a member of the New York Convention of 1958 on the Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Arbitral Awards since 1964, when the country was still a colony of the Netherlands. Upon becoming independent in 1975, Suriname automatically continued its membership in international conventions and treaties. On November 22, 2022, Suriname ratified the agreement and it entered into force on February 8, 2023.There is no specific domestic legislation providing enforcement of awards under the New York Convention or under the ICSID Convention. The Suriname Arbitration Institute has regulations for arbitration, mediation and binding advice modernized, taking into account international developments and applicable legal provisions.						Dispute Settlement						The country is a member state of the Multilateral Investment Guarantee Agency (MIGA)Suriname has no BIT or FTA with an investment chapter with the United States.There have been no publicly known investment disputes in the past 10 years involving a U.S person or another foreign investor. Every effort is made to settle investment disputes outside the court system or via arbitration.Judgments of foreign arbitral awards are enforced by the local courts only if Suriname has a legal treaty of jurisprudence with the foreign country involved. If not, the foreign judgment can be brought before the Surinamese court for consideration as long as the court determines it has jurisdiction and doing so does not otherwise violate any Surinamese laws. With Suriname’s participation and membership in the Caribbean Court of Justice, judgments from this court are also binding for local courts. Cases have been successfully filed against Suriname before the Inter-American Court of Justice and the Organization of American States. Judgments from these courts have been upheld by the Surinamese legal system.There is no known history of extrajudicial action against foreign investors.						International Commercial Arbitration and Foreign Courts						Suriname’s civil law includes options for arbitration. The government reactivated the Suriname Arbitration Institute (SAI) in August 2014 to offer arbitration and mediation services. The SAI collaborates with the Dutch Arbitration Institute.The Mediation Council, pursuant to the Labor Mediation Act of 1946, promotes the peaceful settlement of disputes concerning labor issues and the prevention of such disputes in Suriname.Local courts only recognize and enforce foreign arbitral awards if doing so is stipulated in the contract or agreement and it does not contradict local law. Foreign arbitration is an accepted means of settling disputes between private parties, but only if local alternatives are exhausted.There have been no publicly known investment disputes in which state-owned enterprises are involved. Court processes are, in general, considered transparent and non-discriminatory.																										Bankruptcy Regulations										Suriname has bankruptcy legislation. Creditors, equity shareholders, and holders of other financial contracts, including foreign contract holders, have the right to file for liquidation of debts due to insolvency. In a case where there is a loan from a commercial bank, repayment of the bank loan takes precedence. Bankruptcy, in principle, is not criminalized. However, in cases where a board of directors encouraged a company to pursue bankruptcy to avoid creditors, courts have viewed this behavior as a criminal offense. In the World Bank’s Doing Business Report, Suriname stands at 139 in the ranking of 190 economies on the ease of resolving insolvency.																																												4. Industrial Policies						    																																																Investment Incentives										Under current regulations, foreign investors, including underrepresented investors such as women can benefit from both tax and non-tax incentives.  Tax-based incentives include a nine-year tax holiday that can be extended by one year if the investment is at least $13 million; accelerated depreciation of assets; and tax consolidation.  Under the Raw Minerals Act, the government grants an exemption of duties for the import of raw materials from CARICOM member countries.  Exemptions are also granted in the food industry, the soft drink industry, and the fruit juice industry.  In 2011, the government eliminated import duties on computers and related items.  The law accords special consideration on investments exceeding $50 million and investments in the exploration and exploitation of bauxite, hydrocarbons, gold, and radioactive minerals.  Large investments in the mining sector are subject to extensive negotiations between the government and investors.  The government maintains the ability to grant incentives that depart from the provisions in the 2001 Investment Law, for example, incentives related to the provisions of infrastructure.The government does not have a practice of issuing guarantees or jointly financing foreign direct investment projects.The government currently does not offer incentives such as feed-in tariffs, discounts on electricity rates, or tax incentives for clean energy investments, including renewable energy, energy storage, energy efficiency, clean hydrogen, carbon sequestration, low-carbon transport and fuels, and other de-carbonization technologies.																																				Foreign Trade Zones/Free Ports/Trade Facilitation										Suriname does not have a free trade zone or duty-free zone.																																				Performance and Data Localization Requirements										There are no enforcement procedures for performance requirements on investors.The 2001 Investment Law authorizes the Minister of Finance to grant both tax and non-tax incentives for new investments and for the expansion of existing investments. Incentives for new investments are on a case-by-case basis at the discretion of the Ministry of Finance. Incentives are available for both domestic and foreign investors, but investors must apply for these incentives before the initial investment is made.Foreign IT providers are not required to turn over source code and/or provide access to encryption.There are no measures that prevent or unduly impede companies from freely transmitting customer or other business-related data outside the country’s territory.There are no mechanisms used to enforce any rules on local data storage within the country.																																												5. Protection of Property Rights						    																																																Real Property										Property rights are enforced. Mortgages and liens are common. Mortgages are registered with the Mortgage Office. However, no effective registration system exists for other types of liens.Non-residents can request to lease land from the government if they have established a company under Surinamese law. However, the process from application to approval is lengthy.The proportion of land in Suriname that lacks a clear land title remains unknown. There is no sustained effort by the government to identify property owners and register land titles. Article 1-1 of the L-1 decree, Principles of Land Policy, states that “all land, to which others have not proven their right to ownership, is the domain of the State.” Furthermore, Article 41 of the Surinamese constitution states that natural wealth and resources are property of the nation and shall be used to promote economic, social, and cultural development. There is no effective demarcation of substantial land claims by indigenous people in the interior.Unoccupied, legally purchased property cannot be reverted to other owners, such as squatters.																																				Intellectual Property Rights										Suriname is not mentioned in the 2023 United States Trade Representative’s Special 301 Report.Suriname is a member of the World Trade Organization and the World Intellectual Property Organization; however, it has not ratified the Agreement on Trade Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights (TRIPS). Even though Suriname is party to multiple agreements, intellectual property rights (IPR) enforcement is weak. The current legal framework mentions protection of copyright, trademarks, and patents based on legislation from 1912 (amended in 2001). Although the National Assembly passed amendments to the Music Copyright Law of 1913 in March 2015, there is no enforcement. Infringement on rights and theft are not uncommon due to the absence of enforcement capacity. There is also no protection provided for industrial designs, utility models, geographical indications, layout designs of integrated circuits or undisclosed information.No IPR-related laws or regulations have been enacted in the past year. A draft IPR bill had been pending under the previous National Assembly (2015-2020), but it did not receive a vote. Currently, patents and copyrights must be registered abroad due to a lack of local legislation.Suriname doesn’t track or report seizures of counterfeit goods. Statistics are not available. IPR violations are rarely produced.Suriname is not named in the 2022 Notorious Markets List. For additional information about national laws and points of contact at local IP offices, please see WIPO’s country profiles at  http://www.wipo.int/directory/en/. 																																												6. Financial Sector						    																																																Capital Markets and Portfolio Investment										The government does not promote portfolio investment.There is a small self-regulating stock market with eleven companies registered. It meets twice a month but does not have an electronic exchange. There is no effective regulatory system to encourage and facilitate portfolio investment. At present, Suriname is facing liquidity shortfalls. Sufficient policies do exist to facilitate the free flow of financial resources.As an IMF Article VIII member, Suriname has agreed to refrain from restrictions on payments and transfers for current international transactions.Credit is allocated on market terms and at market rates. Foreign investors that establish businesses in Suriname are able to get credit on the local market, usually with a payment guarantee from the parent company. The private sector has access to a variety of credit instruments. Larger companies can obtain customized credit products. There is, however, a Central Bank regulation that limits a commercial bank’s credit exposure to a single client.																																				Money and Banking System										The private sector has access to a variety of credit instruments. Larger companies can obtain customized credit products.According to the IMF Staff Country report 2022, vulnerabilities in the banking system have persisted. Recent data suggest that the solvency situation has further deteriorated in two of the three banks that were already undercapitalize and now report negative capital. A fourth bank remains close to breaching the regulatory capital requirement.Based on November 2021 data, the total non-performing loan ratio was 12.0 percent.,The estimated total assets of the economy&#8217;s largest banks are:DSB Bank (annual report, 2019): $965.8 million. Hakrin Bank (annual report Dec, 2020): $609.1million. Republic Bank Limited (2022 annual report, Suriname-based assets): $432.3 million. (The Republic Bank Limited of Trinidad and Tobago acquired Royal Bank of Canada’s Suriname holdings in 2015. Finabank (annual report, 2021): $328.3 million.Suriname has a central bank system.Foreign banks or branches are allowed to establish operations in Suriname. They are subject to the same measures and regulations as local banks. According to an IMF assessment in 2016, banks in Suriname are among those in the region that have lost their correspondent relationships. The IMF notes that though the loss of correspondent banking relationships has not reached systemic proportions, a critical risk still exists. According to the IMF’s Article IV Consultation report in 2019, there is a possibility of losing corresponding banking relationships given recent overseas investigations of potential money laundering via Suriname’s financial sector. The reputational risk to both local and foreign banks acting as their correspondents is substantial. In November 2021, Suriname made its National Risk Assessment publicly available.There are no restrictions for foreigners to open a bank account. Banks require U.S. citizens to provide the information necessary to comply with the Foreign Accounts Tax Compliance Act (FATCA). The process is a lengthy one.																																				Foreign Exchange and Remittances																										Foreign Exchange						There are no restrictions or limitations placed on foreign investors in converting, transferring, or repatriating funds associated with an investment, such as remittances of investment capital, earnings, loan or lease payments, or royalties.Funds associated with any form of investment can be freely converted into a usable currency at legal market clearing rates with the permission of the Foreign Exchange Commission. However, the criteria for obtaining permissions are opaque.The exchange rate is determined by market supply and demand. Parties trade foreign currency on the foreign exchange market through the intermediary of banks and exchange offices. The Central bank determines and publishes the weighted exchange rate three times a day based on reported volumes and transactions rates. On June 7, 2021, the Central Bank of Suriname (CBvS) eliminated the peg to the USD and allowed the Suriname Dollar to float at market rates. In addition to the official exchange rate, different rates are available unofficially in parallel exchange markets.						Remittance Policies						There are no recent changes or plans to change investment remittance policies.The waiting period on remittances can be relatively short for dividends; return on investments, interest, and principal on private foreign debt; lease payments; royalties; and management fees. The time needed to process the requests depends on the sector and the amount transferred. Transfers through the banking system can range from same day to one week waiting times, contingent upon approval by the Foreign Exchange Commission.																										Sovereign Wealth Funds										On May 4, 2017, the National Assembly passed legislation establishing a Sovereign Wealth Fund (SWF). In August 2020, President Santokhi announced that the government would operationalize Suriname’s SWF, as the previous government had not instituted the necessary state decrees to do so. In December 2020, the government held talks with experts from Norway to learn about the Norwegian SWF.Suriname does not participate in the International Forum of Sovereign Wealth Funds.																																												7. State-Owned Enterprises						    																						State owned enterprises (SOEs) operate in the oil, agribusiness, mining, communications, travel, energy, and financial sectors. The Ministry of Finance is currently working on developing a data base for SOEs. The Finance Ministry recently announced that 22 parastatals are wholly owned. The ministry has also published some annual reports of SOEs from 2015 to 2020. There are SOEs that are governed by a director and some by a board. The Ministry is still in the process of information gathering from SOEs. According to data currently available, the number of employees is 13,789. Data regarding total assets and total net income of SOEs is not available.There is no public list of SOEs.SOEs receive advantages when competing in the domestic market. These include access to government guarantees and government loans otherwise unavailable to private enterprises. Additionally, SOEs have access to land and raw materials inaccessible to private entities.State-owned enterprises operate in various sectors such as the agricultural, mining, transport and utilities. For some SOEs the government has not set rates in line with the market due to social- political considerations. However, we are not aware of any SOE discriminating against private companies.Currently, five state-owned companies export abroad, three of which also export to the USA. There are initiatives from one state-owned company to invest in the USA, but limited access to financial resources has hindered these efforts. There are partnerships between some state-owned companies with companies in the United States.The government does not yet adhere to the OECD Guidelines on Corporate Governance for SOEs. However, the government’s 2021 restructuring plan mentions that there are plans to implement policies in cooperation with international institutions such as the IDB regarding corporate governance for SOEs.																										Privatization Program										In 2012, the Government of Suriname announced a privatization program largely in the agricultural sector, but the only privatization was the state-owned banana company in 2014. The official governing accord of the ruling coalition states that privatization of SOEs will be considered where appropriate, and President Santokhi has indicated that some SOEs will need to be privatized. However, no privatizations have taken place since the new government installation in July 2020.Foreign investors can participate in privatization programs. In 2014, the Belgium multinational, UNIVEG, acquired a 90 percent stake in the state-owned banana company through a public, international bidding process; the European Commission assisted with the bidding. Later, UNIVEG pulled out, and the Government took over the remaining 90 percent of shares and UNIVEG’s $15 million debt and is now the only share holder. This is the only example of privatization in Suriname. No standard privatization or public bidding process has been established.No standard privatization or public bidding process has been established.																																												8. Responsible Business Conduct						    																						There is a growing awareness of expectations and standards for responsible business conduct (RBC) among consumers and producers. Historically, Alcoa’s subsidiary Suralco took the lead on RBC in Suriname, and large multinationals such as Newmont continue to be the largest proponents of RBC. Some larger state-owned and local companies also model RBC, including Staatsolie, Surinam Airways, Telesur, and the Fernandes Group of Companies, which hold the distribution rights for Coca-Cola and the McDonalds franchise rights. In March 2020, several prominent local companies and business leaders established the SU4SU COVID-19 support fund, which raised money and donated medical equipment and PPE to local health authorities to assist their efforts in combatting the COVID-19 pandemic.The host government has not instituted or proposed requirements for businesses to conduct due diligence or reporting regarding human rights or other responsible business conduct issues.The government has not taken measures to encourage RBC such as promoting the OECD Guidelines, the UNGPs, and/or initiatives that implement the UNGPs in specific sectors such as the VP and ICoCA. Companies are allowed to develop their own policies and standards. The government incorporates RBC in some of its partnerships and agreements with multinational firms. For example, recent agreements between Staatsolie and foreign companies for offshore drilling include stipulations regarding RBC. The government has no national point of contact or ombudsman for stakeholders to acquire information or raise concerns about RBC. The Government of Suriname has not conducted a National Action Plan on RBC or Business and Human Rights. It is not known if RBC policies are part of the government’s procurement decisions.There are a few reported cases of child labor, and none can be indicative of systematic forced labor or a problem with the supply chain. Child labor has been identified in various sectors including agriculture, wood processing, small construction, street vending, but are believed to be a much bigger problem in the artisanal gold sector. The true extent of the continues to be unknown as there has been no resent research on this issue. The government did report that after COVID-19 restrictions were lifted, nearly 5,000 students, mostly in the interior, did not return to school. Most are believed to have entered the workforce, primarily the gold mining sector. Economic downturn has also let in an increased number of children working to support their parents, and younger siblings. The government continues to have land right issues with indigenous and maroon communities as the land rights of these groups have not been recognized by law. Both report continues infringements on their lands, including the issuances of titles to land originally inhabited by these communities. These titles include permits for extractions on natural resources including gold and timber.There have been no reports of high-profile, controversial instances of private sector impact on human rights.The Labor Inspection Department from the Ministry of Labor supervises and enforces the observance of legal regulations regarding the conditions of employment and the protection of employees performing duties. Laws were enforced only in the formal sectors. Labor inspectors did not make regular occupational safety and health inspections. The government is drafting consumer and environmental protection laws. In March 2020, the National Assembly passed an Environment Framework Law.There is no legislation for corporate governance nor executive compensation standards to protect shareholders. The Act on Annual Accounts requires companies to publish annual accounts based on the International Financial Reporting Standards (IFRS) since 2020.The Suriname Trade and Business Association has taken the lead in promoting RBC. The Suriname Conservation Foundation initiated a Green Partnership Program in 2020 signed by 14 enterprises, 13 of which are local, to stimulate awareness about a green economy and nature preservation. So far, no incidents have been reported indicating that those monitoring and or advocating around RBC cannot work freely.The host government has not encouraged adherence to the OECD Due Diligence Guidance for Responsible Supply Chain of Minerals from Conflict-Afflicted and High-Risk Areas. In March 2019, the government adopted legislation to join the Kimberley Process Certification Scheme in order to become a member of the World Diamond Council Association.Suriname became a member of the Extractive Industry Transparency Initiative in 2017. There are no domestic transparency measures requiring the disclosure of payments made to governments and/or other RBC/BHR policies or practices.Suriname is not a signatory of The Montreux Document on Private Military and Security companies, a supporter of the International Code of Conduct for Private Security Providers nor a participant in the International Code of Conduct for Private Security Service Providers Association (ICoCA).																										Additional Resources										Department of StateCountry Reports on Human Rights Practices ( https://www.state.gov/reports-bureau-of-democracy-human-rights-and-labor/country-reports-on-human-rights-practices/)Trafficking in Persons Report ( https://www.state.gov/trafficking-in-persons-report/)Guidance on Implementing the &#8220;UN Guiding Principles&#8221; for Transactions Linked to Foreign Government End-Users for Products or Services with Surveillance Capabilities ( https://www.state.gov/key-topics-bureau-of-democracy-human-rights-and-labor/due-diligence-guidance/)U.S. National Contact Point for the OECD Guidelines for Multinational Enterprises ( https://www.state.gov/u-s-national-contact-point-for-the-oecd-guidelines-for-multinational-enterprises/)Xinjiang Supply Chain Business Advisory ( https://www.state.gov/xinjiang-supply-chain-business-advisory/)Department of the TreasuryOFAC Recent Actions ( https://home.treasury.gov/policy-issues/financial-sanctions/recent-actions )Department of LaborFindings on the Worst Forms of Child Labor Report ( https://www.dol.gov/agencies/ilab/resources/reports/child-labor/findings  )List of Goods Produced by Child Labor or Forced Labor ( https://www.dol.gov/agencies/ilab/reports/child-labor/list-of-goods )Sweat &amp; Toil: Child Labor, Forced Labor, and Human Trafficking Around the World ( https://www.dol.gov/general/apps/ilab )Comply Chain ( https://www.dol.gov/ilab/complychain/ )																																				Climate Issues										In March 2020, the National Assembly approved the National Environmental Framework Act. The government sets out its policy regarding the environment in the environmental strategy as laid down in the development plan 2017-2021of Suriname and Suriname’s National Determined Contribution report.The current government is discussing Carbon-Credit policies, but details are not yet known.Although Suriname is carbon negative, the Environmental Authority is considering CO2 and GHG reduction regulations for the private sector.The National Institute for Environment and Development in Suriname (NIMOS) is in the process of finalizing the first set regulations. Regulatory incentives are not yet in place.The environmental Framework Act mentions in article 19 that an environmental fund is to be set up to co-finance the activities of the following:The National Environmental Authority (NMA) within the scope of protecting, conserving and sustainable use of the environmentIntroducing incentives to reduce environmental pollutionStimulating research amongst others in the context of climate change and loss of biodiversityIncreasing environmental awareness in SurinameOther activities for the conservation and restoration of the environment or that are beneficial to the protection of the environment that cannot be financed from other resources. At present these incentives are not being implemented/enforced.Activities in the gold sector have an impact on deforestation. Especially artisanal small gold mining activities. Currently there are no specific policies on the impact of the gold sector on deforestation.Some types of public procurement policies must follow the Environmental Framework Act, and include environmental, and green growth considerations such as resource efficiency, pollution abatement and climate resilience.																																												9. Corruption						    																						Suriname’s legal code penalizes corruption, but often enforcement has been sporadic. Government officials are occasionally removed from assignments, but convictions are rare. On September 1, 2017, the parliament passed anti-corruption legislation nearly 15 years after the initial draft bill was introduced to the National Assembly. On February 23, 2023, the government nominated 9 persons to take part in the anti-corruption commission. Suriname ranks 85 out of 180 countries on the Corruption Index of Transparency International.The government does not encourage or require private companies to establish internal codes of conduct prohibiting bribery of public officials. Local private companies do not use internal controls, ethics, or compliance programs to detect and prevent bribery of government officials. Multinationals follow international standards.Private companies do not use internal controls, ethics, and compliance programs to detect and prevent bribery of government officials.Suriname has signed and ratified the Inter-American Convention against Corruption.Last November, the authorities announced that Suriname ratified the UN Convention against Corruption. Suriname is not a party to the OECD Convention on Combatting Bribery.There are no NGOs that focus exclusively on investigating corruption.U.S. firms have identified corruption as an obstacle to FDI. Corruption is believed to be most pervasive in government procurement, the awarding of licenses and concessions, customs, and taxation.																										Resources to Report Corruption										Contact at the government agency or agencies that are responsible for combating corruption:Fraud Department Suriname Police Force (Korps Politie Suriname)Havenlaan, Paramaribo, Suriname(597) 404-943The government has yet to operationalize an anti-corruption commission.																																												10. Political and Security Environment						    																						Suriname has no history of politically motivated violence. In February 2023, protests against government policies turned violent and led to businesses being looted.In July 2019, illegal goldminers damaged property at the Rosebel goldmine after the company’s security personnel fatally shot an illegal goldminer. The mine was subsequently closed for one month, and then reopened.Political polarization has not become severe in Suriname. Elections are considered free and fair by international observers, including national elections on May 25, 2020, which brought the then-opposition parties to power.																																		11. Labor Policies and Practices						    																						In general, both skilled and unskilled labor is available on the local market. Foreign workers are mainly active in the extractive industries and agricultural sector. Haitians and Cubans have entered the workforce and are active in several sectors, often at lower wages. Documented foreign workers are protected by labor laws. Labor force data shows that men are better represented in the labor market. The majority of jobseekers are women. On the Global Gender Gap Index 2021 Suriname has a score of 0.7 in the area of Economic Participation and Opportunity. According to the Statistical Bureau, the unemployment rate in 2019 was 11 percent. The ministry of Labor does report a gap in labor skills available and the sectors of economy that are seeking workers.An estimated 15 percent of the working-age population worked in the informal economy. There is no recent data on informal employment. Outdated, limited or absent data of the labor force and employment vacancies hinder a complete description and analysis.Heavy equipment operators, welders and other skilled workers continue to be in high demand in the extractive industries. Business organizations also reported worker shortages in the hospitality sector, wood processing and manufacturing sectors. The healthcare sector also reported a shortage of skilled healthcare professionals. To alleviate this shortage somewhat, the government turned to Cuba and the Philippines in 2022, as it did in past years. In June 2022, 16 doctors and 6 healthcare workers from Cuba arrived in Suriname to support the general healthcare system, while in February 2023, three healthcare specialists from the Philippines arrived in Suriname to support the Neonatal Intensive Care Unit (NICU). There continues to be a shortage of skilled health care workers.While no policies exist that explicitly require the hiring of nationals, the Work Permits Act prohibits the hiring of foreign workers without a work permit granted by the Ministry of Labor. However, the 2022 amendment to the Law on Working Permits for Foreign Workers explicitly states that the request for a work permit for a foreigner can be denied if there are workers available on the local market or if their availability can be expected in a reasonable timeframe.Labor laws make it difficult for employers to respond to fluctuating market conditions. The Dismissal Permits Act prohibits employers from dismissing employees without permission from the Ministry of Labor. Collective redundancy for organizational or economic reasons is permitted in cases such as the closure or decline of a business. Generally, when an employee is laid off, unions negotiate with the employer regarding a package and duration of social benefits. Labor organizations sometimes object to work based on contracts as opposed to full time, ongoing employment. There is no unemployment insurance or other safety program for persons laid off for economic reasons.Labor laws are not waived to attract or retain investment. Suriname does not have special economic zones, foreign trade zones, or free ports with alternative labor policies.Collective bargaining agreements are widespread in both the private and public sector. Data regarding the percentage of the economy covered by collective bargaining agreements is unavailable. Employees of most large multi-national firms are unionized.Labor dispute mechanisms are in place and regularly used for mediation and arbitration. Labor Strikes posing an investment risk are rare.There were no strikes last year that posed an investment risk.Suriname is a member of the International Labor Organization and recognizes international labor law in its domestic legislation. In 2018, Suriname made a moderate advancement in efforts to eliminate the worst forms of child labor. The government ratified International Labor Organization Convention 138 concerning the minimum age for admission to employment, acceded to the Protocol to the Forced Labor Convention, and amended the Law on Labor for Children and Young People, raising the minimum age of work to 16 years.In 2022, the National Assembly passed the Law to Prevent and Combat Sexual Intimidation on the Work Floor, the Law on Equal Treatment in Labor, as well as an amendment to the Law on Work Permits for Foreign Workers.																																		12. U.S. International Development Finance Corporation (DFC), and Other Investment Insurance or Development Finance Programs						    																						Suriname signed an Investment Incentive Agreement with the United States in 1993. It has not been amended.																																		13. Foreign Direct Investment Statistics						    																						Table 2: Key Macroeconomic Data, U.S. FDI in Host Country/EconomyHost Country Statistical source*USG or international statistical sourceUSG or International Source of Data:  BEA; IMF; Eurostat; UNCTAD, OtherEconomic DataYearAmountYearAmountHost Country Gross Domestic Product (GDP) ($M USD)2021$2,9 billion2021$2.98 billionwww.worldbank.org/en/countryForeign Direct InvestmentHost Country Statistical source*USG or international statistical sourceUSG or international Source of data:  BEA; IMF; Eurostat; UNCTAD, OtherU.S. FDI in partner country ($M USD, stock positions)20xx$Amt20xx$AmtBEA data available at https://apps.bea.gov/international/factsheet/ N/AHost country’s FDI in the United States ($M USD, stock positions)20xx$Amt20xx$AmtBEA data available at https://apps.bea.gov/international/factsheet/ N/ATotal inbound stock of FDI as % host GDP20xx$Amt202166.2%UNCTAD data available athttps://unctad.org/topic/investment/world-investment-report   * Source for Host Country Data: Central Bank of SurinameTable 3: Sources and Destination of FDIWe were unable to locate U.S. FDI data in partner country.																																		14. Contact for More Information						    																						Political Economic ChiefKristalstraat 165, Paramaribo, Suriname(597) 556-700griffithcp@state.gov																										    							View report by:																				Albania											Algeria											Andorra											Angola											Antigua and Barbuda											Argentina											Armenia											Australia											Austria											The Bahamas											Azerbaijan											Bahrain											Bangladesh											Barbados											Belarus											Belgium											Belize											Benin											Bolivia											Bosnia and Herzegovina											Botswana											Brazil											Brunei											Bulgaria											Burkina Faso											Burma											Burundi											Cabo Verde											Cambodia											Cameroon											Canada											Chile											China											Colombia											Costa Rica											Côte d’Ivoire											Croatia											Cyprus											Czechia											Democratic Republic of the Congo											Denmark											Djibouti											Dominica											Dominican Republic											Ecuador											Egypt											El Salvador											Equatorial Guinea											Eritrea											Estonia											Eswatini											Ethiopia											Fiji											Finland											France and Monaco											The Gambia											Gabon											Georgia											Germany											Ghana											Greece											Grenada											Guatemala											Guinea											Guyana											Honduras											Haiti											Hong Kong											Hungary											Iceland											India											Indonesia											Iraq											Ireland											Israel											Italy											Jamaica											Japan											Jordan											Kazakhstan											Kenya											Kosovo											Kyrgyz Republic											Laos											Latvia											Lebanon											Lesotho											Liberia											Libya											Lithuania											Luxembourg											Macau											Madagascar											Malawi											Malaysia											Maldives											Mali											Malta											Marshall Islands											Mauritania											Mauritius											Mexico											Micronesia											Moldova											Mongolia											Montenegro											Morocco											Mozambique											Namibia											Nepal											Netherlands											New Zealand											Nicaragua											Niger											Nigeria											North Macedonia											Norway											Oman											Pakistan											Palau											Panama											Papua New Guinea											Paraguay											Peru											Philippines											Poland											Portugal											Qatar											Republic of the Congo											Romania											Rwanda											Saint Kitts and Nevis											Saint Lucia											Saint Vincent and the Grenadines											Samoa											Sao Tome and Principe											Saudi Arabia											Senegal											Serbia											Seychelles											Sierra Leone											Singapore											Slovakia											Slovenia											Somalia											South Africa											South Korea											South Sudan											Spain											Sri Lanka											Suriname											Sweden											Switzerland											Taiwan											Tajikistan											Tanzania											Thailand											Timor-Leste											Togo											Trinidad and Tobago											Tunisia											Türkiye											United Arab Emirates											Uganda											Ukraine											United Kingdom											Uruguay											Uzbekistan											Vietnam											West Bank and Gaza											Zambia											Zimbabwe															Build A Custom Report																						On This Page				search													>																										EXECUTIVE SUMMARY																1. Openness To, and Restrictions Upon, Foreign Investment																																							Policies Towards Foreign Direct Investment																																																						Limits on Foreign Control and Right to Private Ownership and Establishment																																																						Other Investment Policy Reviews																																																						Business Facilitation																																																						Outward Investment																																																			2. Bilateral Investment and Taxation Treaties																3. Legal Regime																																							Transparency of the Regulatory System																																																				International Regulatory Considerations																																												Legal System and Judicial Independence																																																																																				Laws and Regulations on Foreign Direct Investment																																																						Competition and Antitrust Laws																																																						Expropriation and Compensation																																																						Dispute Settlement																																																				ICSID Convention and New York Convention																																												Dispute Settlement																																												International Commercial Arbitration and Foreign Courts																																																																																				Bankruptcy Regulations																																																			4. Industrial Policies																																							Investment Incentives																																																						Foreign Trade Zones/Free Ports/Trade Facilitation																																																						Performance and Data Localization Requirements																																																			5. Protection of Property Rights																																							Real Property																																																						Intellectual Property Rights																																																			6. Financial Sector																																							Capital Markets and Portfolio Investment																																																						Money and Banking System																																																						Foreign Exchange and Remittances																																																				Foreign Exchange																																												Remittance Policies																																																																																				Sovereign Wealth Funds																																																			7. State-Owned Enterprises																																							Privatization Program																																																			8. Responsible Business Conduct																																							Additional Resources																																																						Climate Issues																																																			9. Corruption																																							Resources to Report Corruption																																																			10. Political and Security Environment																11. Labor Policies and Practices																12. U.S. International Development Finance Corporation (DFC), and Other Investment Insurance or Development Finance Programs																13. Foreign Direct Investment Statistics																14. Contact for More Information																						Tags																					Bureau of Economic and Business Affairs																								Bureau of Western Hemisphere Affairs																								Suriname
- Press briefing with Todd D. Robinson, Assistant Secretary of State for International Narcotics and Law Enforcement Affairs Todd D.  Robinson, Assistant SecretaryBureau of International Narcotics and Law Enforcement AffairsMODERATOR:  Greetings to everyone from the U.S. Department of State’s Media Hub of the Americas in Miami, Florida.  I would like to welcome our participants who have dialed in from the United States and across the region.  This is an on-the-record press briefing with the Assistant Secretary of State for International Narcotics and Law Enforcement Affairs Todd D. Robinson. Assistant Secretary Robinson will discuss outcomes from Friday’s virtual ministerial to launch a Global Coalition to Address Synthetic Drug Threats as well as next steps for the global coalition.  This coalition seeks to unite countries worldwide in a concerted effort to prevent the illicit manufacture and trafficking of synthetic drugs, identify emerging drug trends, and respond effectively to their public health impacts. As a reminder, today’s briefing is on the record.  And with that, I will turn it over to Assistant Secretary Robinson. ASSISTANT SECRETARY ROBINSON:  Thank you for joining this call today and for the opportunity to discuss the collective efforts we have undertaken to confront the important issue of synthetic drugs. Last Friday, as you know, Secretary Blinken hosted a virtual ministerial to launch a Global Coalition to Address Synthetic Drug Threats.  Nearly 100 countries and international organizations participated in the launch, underscoring the shared concern about this public health and national security threat.  The coalition aims to unite countries worldwide in a concerted effort to combat the illicit manufacture and trafficking of synthetic drugs.  Together, we hope to strengthen efforts to prevent the production and trafficking of illicit synthetic drugs, identify emerging synthetic drug trends and use patterns, and promote efforts to respond effectively to the public health impacts they impose. Participants at the ministerial underscored the importance of sharing data and increasing efforts to mitigate the health impact of synthetic drug use.  As you all already know, synthetic drugs such as fentanyl and methamphetamine pose a grave risk to the health and security of our citizens here in the United States.  The consequences of these drugs are devastating as evidenced by the alarming statistics. In 2022, the CDC estimated that nearly 110,000 Americans lost their lives to drug overdoses.  Recognizing the gravity of this situation, the Biden administration is fully committed to preventing drug use and minimizing its negative impact.  We understand the importance of connecting individuals to treatment and supporting the more than 20 million Americans in recovery.  President Biden’s National Drug Control Strategy has allocated a substantial $24 billion dollars in this fiscal year to strengthen drug-related public health interventions.  These measures not only safeguard the health of our citizens, but also exemplify our dedication at home as we look to other nations to also take action. It is vital to note that these dangers are not limited to the United States.  More countries than ever are facing an increasing threat from synthetic drugs like tramadol, Captagon, MDMA, and Ketamine.  Criminals are constantly innovating to create new synthetic drugs, adjusting formulas to avoid international controls and domestic regulations, and creating new demand.   One staggering number to note:  Over the past decade, more than 1,100 new synthetic drugs were detected and reported by the United Nations.  Through the Global Coalition to Address Synthetic Drug Threats, we are harnessing international cooperation and shared knowledge to tackle this crisis head on.  By working together, we can more effectively disrupt the illicit synthetic drug supply chains, enhance our ability to identify and respond to emerging threats, and protect the lives and well-being of our own citizens and of people around the world. The United States has already been working with partners like Mexico, Canada, and other countries to drive urgent global action to disrupt the synthetic drug trade from beginning to end.  We are engaging with countries such as India to strengthen our partnerships on securing pharmaceutical and chemical supply chains to prevent criminal diversion of dual-use precursor chemicals, and we remain committed to engaging with the PRC to address the threat illicit synthetic drugs pose to our countries.  The Department of State also works within the UN, the Organization of American States, the G7, G20, and other organizations to improve the abilities of our countries to detect and disrupt the illicit manufacturing, diversion, and trafficking of precursor chemicals and finished drugs.   We have more important work to do, so in closing, let me express my gratitude to our international partners who have already joined us in this crucial endeavor.  The fight against synthetic drugs requires a global response, and we are confident that our collective efforts will yield significant results.  Together, we can create a safer and healthier future for our citizens and generations to come.   Thank you, and I look forward to your questions.   MODERATOR:  Thank you so much, Assistant Secretary.  We will now begin the question-and-answer portion of today’s briefing.  For those on the English line asking questions, please limit yourself to one question related to the topic of today’s briefing.  If you submitted your question in advance, I have incorporated the question into the queue.  Our first question today we received from Daniel – from Jim Carson of La Jornada in Mexico:  “What specific will be new out of this declaration?  Are you setting up a FinCEN-type structure to share information, do evaluations, and a secretariat, or is it simply a reiteration of past commitments without any specific additional actions?”   ASSISTANT SECRETARY ROBINSON:  Great question.  The first thing I would say is we are – we are building on what we have done in the past and what has been done by other countries in the past.  The coalition is intended to be an inclusive forum for sharing best practices and identifying areas for collaboration to improve the global response to public health and security threats posed by synthetic drugs.  We ask that countries commit to working collaboratively with other coalition member countries at both political and technical levels to develop a joint framework for addressing synthetic drugs and develop actions in line with that framework.  Thanks.   MODERATOR:  Thank you.  We received a question from journalist Fernando Morales from Red Salvadoreña de Medios in El Salvador: “El Salvador is a corridor for the transit of synthetic drugs like fentanyl.  How is work being done to prevent the trafficking of these narcotics?”   ASSISTANT SECRETARY ROBINSON:  I’m sorry.  Could you say that again?  MODERATOR:  Absolutely, Assistant Secretary.  “El Salvador is a corridor for the transit of synthetic drugs like fentanyl.  How is work being done to prevent the trafficking of these narcotics?&#8221; ASSISTANT SECRETARY ROBINSON:  Great question.  As our correspondent will note, the United States Government on several different levels is working with members of the civilian security forces in El Salvador and throughout the region – El Salvador, Guatemala, and Honduras – on things like investigations, going after the trafficking networks.  We have experts on the ground from DEA and the Department of Justice.   We also work on training.  As the correspondent will note, there is an International Law Enforcement Academy hosted by the Government of El Salvador where we can do training for police and prosecutors in the region on different techniques and modernized techniques for going after these networks.  So those are ways that we are – those are ways that we are trying to get after these – shut down these corridors.   MODERATOR:  Thank you, Assistant Secretary.  The next question will go to Jesús Esquivel from Proceso Magazine in Mexico.  Jesús, please unmute yourself.   QUESTION:  Hello.  Can you hear me?   MODERATOR:  Yes.  Please ask your question.  &#8212;    QUESTION:  Okay.  Yes.  Under Secretary, there has always been the accusations that the Mexican cartels are responsible for all the synthetic drugs in the United States, but as you probably know, the domestic cartels in the U.S. are also responsible for the distributions and sale of these drugs.   My question to you is:  What exactly or when exactly the U.S. Government for the first time is going to be exposing the domestic cartels in this problem and in the United States?  And also, if you think the accusations as – members of the U.S. Congress made to Mexico and threats that they probably going to invade Mexico to stop the drug trafficking, it will help in this global coalition in the case of – specifically of Mexico to cooperate with the U.S. Government?   ASSISTANT SECRETARY ROBINSON:  Thank you, Jesús.  Both good questions.  Look, first of all, I would – I would not exactly support the premise of your question.  We have never said that all of the fentanyl or synthetic opioids that are coming to the United States are coming from Mexico.  We know that this is a global – a global effort by cartels from different regions around the world, including criminals in the United States.  I don’t think the FBI or the Department of Justice or our local law enforcement authorities have been shy about exposing the criminal networks in the United States that are trafficking in these drugs.  I think they will continue to publicly expose them when available.  So that’s thing number one. Thing number two, we have – the United States has an excellent relationship with our counterparts in Mexico.  We are both working very close to go after the networks in Mexico, to increase our cooperation on both sides of our southwest border, your northern border.  And we are working together internationally to share our experiences with working together with other countries around the world.  I’m very proud of our relationship with our Mexican counterparts, and we’re going to continue to call on them as they call on us to work together to do more to stop – to stop this global trafficking of synthetic drugs. MODERATOR:  Thank you, Assistant Secretary Robison.  The next question will go to Adyr Corral from El Sol de Mexico.  Adyr, please unmute yourself.  Go ahead.  Adyr, can you hear us?   Okay, unfortunately we’re going to have to move on.  I see we have a submitted question in our Q&amp;A from Brendan O’Boyle from Reuters in Mexico City: “Thank you, Ambassador.  Within the coalition, where is there concern about fentanyl’s short-term spread geographically?  In Mexico, some experts have sounded alarm about fentanyl spreading in drug supply domestically, though data is scarce.  Have coalition partners in Mexico recognized domestic spread?” ASSISTANT SECRETARY ROBINSON:  I’m sorry, can you repeat that question again? MODERATOR:  Sure, sir.  “Thank you, Ambassador.  Within the coalition, where is there concern about fentanyl’s short-term spread geographically?  In Mexico, some experts have sounded the alarm about fentanyl spreading in the drug supply domestically, though data is scarce.  Have coalition partners in Mexico recognized domestic spread?” ASSISTANT SECRETARY ROBINSON:  The short answer is I believe the Government of Mexico has recognized the short-term spread of synthetic opioids.  We are – and – but there’s a very good relationship between our Office of National Drug Control Policy and the secretary for Health in Mexico.  They are working very closely together on campaigns to raise awareness about synthetic opioids and what can be done to avoid falling into – into that addiction.  So we feel like we have a burgeoning story to tell, a better story to tell as we go forward on our cooperation on the messaging against the domestic – in Mexico, the domestic spread of the – and growth of the use of synthetic opioids. MODERATOR:  Thank you, Assistant Secretary.  I’m told we’ve resolved the microphone issues with Adyr Corral, so we’ll go back to Adyr Corral from El Sol de Mexico.  Please unmute yourself. QUESTION:  Hi.  You can hear me? ASSISTANT SECRETARY ROBINSON:  Yes. MODERATOR:  We can hear you. QUESTION:  Ah, thank you very much.  Sorry for the problems.  I would like to ask the assistant secretary for a comment on the initiative to designate the fentanyl as a weapon of mass destruction in Congress.  How about that, Assistant Secretary? ASSISTANT SECRETARY ROBINSON:  Thank you, great question.  We have currently – the Department of Justice, DEA, FBI, Department of State – we feel like we have the authorities necessary to go after the networks that are trafficking in these drugs.  At the moment, we don’t see that classifying fentanyl as a weapon of mass destruction will give us any more authority than we already have to try to stop its trafficking.  So we feel pretty comfortable that we’re in a good place in terms of having the tools necessary to go after the drug and to go after the networks that are trafficking the drugs.  QUESTION:  Thank you very much.  MODERATOR:  Thank you, Assistant Secretary.  The next question was submitted in advance from Juan Silva from W Radio in Colombia:  “How do you assess the current situation in Colombia in terms of the fight against drugs?”  ASSISTANT SECRETARY ROBINSON:  Well, as the correspondent, as Juan will know, we have a very long, very strong, very deep relationship with Colombia and Colombia’s security forces that has developed over a number of years.  We feel like we are – we have developed into great partners.  Colombia has become a net exporter of security globally, and that is in large part due to the very strong relationship that has developed with the United States.   Today we continue in that effort.  There are areas where we are hoping to start working – new areas where we are starting to – we want to begin working with the Petro government, and we are in constant conversation with Petro and his team to figure out how we can best help them bring greater security and safety to communities in Colombia, and by doing so, help shut down the networks that are trafficking drugs north to the United States.  Thanks.  MODERATOR:  Thank you, Assistant Secretary.   Our next question we received from Eduard Ribas from EFE:  “What responsibility does China have on the trafficking of fentanyl precursors?  How can this coalition be successful without Chinese participation?”  ASSISTANT SECRETARY ROBINSON:  Well, I would say the – we know good things happen when China is involved in conversations like this.  You will recall in 2019 the Chinese Government scheduled fentanyl and made it much harder to get out of the country directly and be shipped directly to other countries.  And when they did that, the trafficking of fentanyl itself in the United States from China went to almost zero.  So we think that there’s a lot more that can be done by the PRC in terms of greater monitoring and labeling and information-sharing on the precursor chemicals that are leaving the PRC, and they – we invited them to join the coalition.  We expect at some point that they will take us up on our invitation because they want to be responsible, a responsible country in this effort.  And we all know that they play – that there are companies in China that play an important role in the distribution of the precursor chemicals that go into making these drugs.  Over.  MODERATOR:  Thank you, Assistant Secretary.  We have time for about two more questions.  One was submitted in advance from a journalist in Guyana regarding CARICOM, Denis Chabrol from Demarara Waves Online News:  “How badly are Caribbean Community (CARICOM) nations affected by synthetic drugs?”  ASSISTANT SECRETARY ROBINSON:  Thank you.  Again, this is a – that’s a great question.  I would say although we haven’t seen significant production in the Caribbean, it’s important to note that criminal chemists can easily synthesize fentanyl almost anywhere.  The Global Coalition to Address Synthetic Drug Threats will provide a foundation for developing and implementing effective, practical solutions to prevent the illicit manufacture and trafficking of synthetic drugs.  It will help detect emerging drug threats, and we hope it will help respond to the – to their public health impacts.  Over. MODERATOR:  Thank you.  I see in the chat the journalist had added:  “What do we expect from CARICOM and what assistance the U.S. can provide?” ASSISTANT SECRETARY ROBINSON:  Well, actually, I would turn it around.  The question should be:  What more can CARICOM countries do?  And I think, again, when we talk about things like exchanging information, when we talk about things like making sure that they are getting access, making sure their communities are getting access to the antidotes for overdoses, making sure that they are reporting to the international organizations that are collecting information that everybody else can use – those are the things that that we would hope we could get from countries that are involved in the global coalition.  And the United States and the international community will continue to help with training and equipping those police forces and prosecutors that are working on this issue.  Over. MODERATOR:  Thank you, Assistant Secretary.  We had a question from Martin Villena from Andina News Agency in Peru:  “Concerning the Global Coalition to Address Synthetic Drug Threats, does its launch also mean strengthening even more relations with countries such as Peru and Colombia, which face the issue and the related problems concerning cocaine productions in their territories?” ASSISTANT SECRETARY ROBINSON:  Well, we’re always working to strengthening – strengthening the relationship with our good friends in Peru and Colombia.  But in fact, again, we will – what the establishment of this coalition is looking to do is to have our friends from Peru and Colombia share their experiences with other countries around the world and help other countries who don’t have the expertise that our countries do, help them address the issues in their countries.  We have great relationships with our partners in Peru and Colombia; I don’t expect that will change.  But we will – in the establishment of this coalition, we will be asking them to do more to help on a global level.  Over.   MODERATOR:  Thank you, Assistant Secretary.  We received a question from Carrie Kahn with NPR:  “How do proposals from some Republicans in the United States urging military intervention to stop fentanyl trafficking in Mexico affect your plans to enlist global partners?” ASSISTANT SECRETARY ROBINSON:  Well, I would say we’re going to let Congress – the Senate and the House – develop and debate their own ideas.  We are going to – I am focused on working with our civilian security partners globally, making sure that they have the training, the equipment, the strategies; making sure they have access to the expertise necessary to focus on what is our responsibility, which is providing civilian security to our communities, both in the United States and around and world. MODERATOR:  Thank you, Assistant Secretary.  I believe we’ve gone through all the questions that we had today, so that will conclude today’s briefing.  I wanted to thank you for joining us today, as well as all of the journalists on the line for their questions.  If you have any follow-up questions about today’s briefing, you may contact the Miami Media Hub at MiamiHub@state.gov.  An English recording and transcript will be available for this briefing, as well as transcripts in Spanish and Brazilian Portuguese.  Thank you so much and have a good day. ASSISTANT SECRETARY ROBINSON:  Thanks.  Thanks, everybody. 
- Suriname HomeReportsBureau of Economic and Business Affairs2023 Fiscal Transparency Report&#8230;Suriname				hide	document.addEventListener("DOMContentLoaded", function(event) {	if(window.jQuery) {		jQuery( document ).ready(function() {			if (jQuery(".bc_middle").hasClass("collapse")) {				jQuery(".bc_ellipse").click(function(){					jQuery(".bc_hide").toggleClass("visible");					jQuery(".bc_middle").toggle();					jQuery(".bc_ellipse").toggle();					jQuery(".bc_content").toggleClass("noflex");					jQuery(".block_breadcrumbs_content").toggleClass("noflex");				});				jQuery(".bc_hide").click(function(){					jQuery(".bc_hide").toggleClass("visible");					jQuery(".bc_middle").toggle();					jQuery(".bc_ellipse").toggle();					jQuery(".bc_content").toggleClass("noflex");					jQuery(".block_breadcrumbs_content").toggleClass("noflex");				});			} else {				jQuery(".bc_ellipse").hide();			}		});	}});																							2023 Fiscal Transparency Report: Suriname 																																					Bureau of Economic and Business Affairs																																																																																																				 In this section																																												Government-by-Government Assessments: Suriname 																																												Government-by-Government Assessments: Suriname 				During the review period, the government made its executive budget proposal and enacted budget easily accessible to the public within a reasonable period, but not its end-of-year report.  Information on debt obligations was publicly available, including for the sole state-owned enterprise.  The budget included major sources of revenue and expenditure.  Actual revenue and expenditures corresponded to those in the enacted budget.  The government generally followed internationally accepted accounting principles, but it continued to treat loans as revenue.  The supreme audit institution met international standards of independence and audited the entire annual executed budget.  The government specified in law or regulation the criteria and procedures for awarding natural resource extraction contracts and licenses but did not appear to follow these procedures in the mining sector specifically.  Basic information on natural resource extraction awards was not publicly available for mining sector concessions.  The sovereign wealth fund had a sound legal framework.  There are no funds in it, however, so there were no sources of funding nor general approach to withdrawals to disclose.Suriname’s fiscal transparency would be improved by:Making its end-of-year report publicly available within a reasonable period;Fully preparing budget documents according to internationally accepted principles by distinguishing between loans and actual revenues;Following laws and regulations for contracting and licensing in natural resource extraction in practice; andMaking information on natural resource extraction awards publicly available.																												    							View report by:																				Belize											Dominican Republic											Ecuador											El Salvador											Haiti											Nicaragua											Suriname																										On This Page				search													>																										Government-by-Government Assessments: Suriname 																	Tags																					Bureau of Economic and Business Affairs																								Bureau of Western Hemisphere Affairs																								Division for International Finance and Development																								Nicaragua																								Suriname
- Special Representative Syed Promotes Partnerships with U.S. Businesses in Suriname and Brazil Office of the SpokespersonFrom May 30 to June 5, Special Representative for Commercial and Business Affairs Dilawar Syed is visiting Paramaribo, Suriname, and Sao Paulo, Brazil.  In Paramaribo, Special Representative Syed will meet with business leaders and government officials to discuss the value of a welcoming business environment and highlight the opportunities for greater U.S. private sector investment in growing sectors such as mining, marine shipping, and downstream wood manufacturing.In Sao Paulo, Special Representative Syed will address the Unreasonable Goals  Retreat with entrepreneurs from around the world in support of achieving the United Nations’ Sustainable Development Goals.  He will also meet with Brazilian government officials, entrepreneurs, and the business community to discuss the potential for expansion of the U.S.-Brazil commercial partnership in the communications and technology sector.More information on the mission of the U.S. Department of State Office of Commercial and Business Affairs is available here.For media inquiries, please contact EB Press at EB-Press-Inquiry@state.gov.For updates, follow Special Representative Syed on Twitter @BizatState .
- Suriname HomeReportsOffice of International Religious Freedom2022 Report on International Religious Freedom&#8230;Suriname				hide	document.addEventListener("DOMContentLoaded", function(event) {	if(window.jQuery) {		jQuery( document ).ready(function() {			if (jQuery(".bc_middle").hasClass("collapse")) {				jQuery(".bc_ellipse").click(function(){					jQuery(".bc_hide").toggleClass("visible");					jQuery(".bc_middle").toggle();					jQuery(".bc_ellipse").toggle();					jQuery(".bc_content").toggleClass("noflex");					jQuery(".block_breadcrumbs_content").toggleClass("noflex");				});				jQuery(".bc_hide").click(function(){					jQuery(".bc_hide").toggleClass("visible");					jQuery(".bc_middle").toggle();					jQuery(".bc_ellipse").toggle();					jQuery(".bc_content").toggleClass("noflex");					jQuery(".block_breadcrumbs_content").toggleClass("noflex");				});			} else {				jQuery(".bc_ellipse").hide();			}		});	}});																							2022 Report on International Religious Freedom: Suriname																																					Office of International Religious Freedom																																																																																							Download Report																																																																																	 In this section										/																							Executive Summary																																													Executive Summary																															Section I. Religious Demography																																																																																		Section II. Status of Government Respect for Religious Freedom																																																									Legal Framework																																																																											Government Practices																																																																																	Section III. Status of Societal Respect for Religious Freedom																																																																																		Section IV. U.S. Government Policy and Engagement																																																																																																								Executive Summary				The constitution provides for freedom of religion. Both the constitution and the penal code prohibit discrimination based on religion. Any violation may be brought before a court of justice. Religious groups seeking financial support from the government must register with the Ministry of Home Affairs.Limited government financial support for religious groups remained available through the Ministry of Home Affairs, primarily as stipends for clergy. The government continued to pay wages for teachers and support staff of schools managed by religious groups, as well as subsidize their operational costs and school supplies. The government consulted with religious groups on proposed amendments to legislation, including on same-sex marriage. President Chankapersad Santokhi and other officials emphasized the country’s religious diversity and the importance of respect for that diversity during public speeches. The President’s Office hosted multiple events commemorating different religious holidays, highlighting the country’s religious diversity and tolerance, including a multidenominational prayer in honor of National Day of Fellowship and Unity.Members of the Interreligious Council (IRIS), a body encompassing two Hindu groups, two Muslim groups, and the Roman Catholic Church, continued to meet to discuss interfaith activities as well as the impact of government policies on society. IRIS collaborated with the Committee for Christian Churches (CCK) and nonmember religious groups on efforts to promote religious freedom and tolerance.In meetings with government representatives, U.S. embassy officials highlighted U.S. government policy on the importance of protecting religious freedom and tolerance. The Ambassador participated in events hosted by the government commemorating different religious holidays and highlighting religious freedom and diversity. In September, the Ambassador visited the Jodensavane, a historic Jewish site supported by the Ambassador’s Fund for Cultural Preservation, where she emphasized the site’s uniqueness as the first independent Jewish settlement in the Americas. In August, embassy officials visited the mosque of the Suriname Islamic Association (SIV) and met with its leaders to discuss religious freedom. In December, a senior Department of State official delivered remarks during a meeting with IRIS members on the topic of religious freedom. He also visited the SIV mosque and the adjoining Neveh Shalom Synagogue, where he discussed with Muslim and Jewish leaders the country’s model of religious freedom and tolerance.																														Section I.													 Religious Demography												    																																															The U.S. government estimates the population at 633,000 (midyear 2022). According to the 2012 census, the most recent available, approximately half of the population is Christian (26 percent Protestant, 22 percent Catholic, and 3 percent other Christian). Christian groups include Moravian, Lutheran, Dutch Reformed, Baptist, Methodist, Seventh-day Adventist, Jehovah’s Witnesses, and The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. Hindus are 22 percent of the population, including the Sanatan Dharm and the Arya Dewaker. Muslims, including Sunni and Ahmadi Muslims and the World Islamic Call Society, are 14 percent. The remaining 13 percent include Baha’is, Jews, Buddhists, Brahma Kumaris, the International Society for Krishna Consciousness, and three Rastafarian organizations: the Aya Bingi Order, 12th Tribe, and Bobo Shanti.Some Amerindian and Maroon populations, approximately 3 percent of the population, adhere to indigenous religions. Certain Amerindian groups, concentrated principally in the interior and to a lesser extent in coastal areas, practice shamanism through a piaiman (medicine man). Many Maroons, descendants of Africans who fled Dutch colonial plantations, worship nature. Persons of Amerindian and Maroon origin who identify as Christian often combine Christian practices with Indigenous religious customs. Some Creoles in urban areas, as well as some Maroons, worship their ancestors through a rite called wintie.There is some overlap between ethnicity and religion. Hinduism is primarily linked to descendants of East Indian immigrants, while Islam is practiced by members of the same immigrant group, as well as by Javanese and Creoles. Christianity crosses all ethnic backgrounds.																																					Section II.													 Status of Government Respect for Religious Freedom												    																																																Legal Framework										The constitution states that everyone has freedom of religion, and individuals may not be discriminated against on the grounds of religion. Individuals may choose to change their religion. Any violation of religious freedom may be brought before a court of justice.The penal code provides punishment for those who instigate hate or discrimination against persons based on religion or creed in any way. Those found guilty may be sentenced to a prison term of no longer than one year and a fine of up to 25,000 Surinamese dollars (SRD) ($788). In cases where an insult or act of hatred is instigated by more than one person, as part of an organization, or by a person who makes such statements habitually or as part of work, the punishment may include imprisonment of up to two years and fines of up to SRD 50,000 ($1,600).Religious groups must register with the Ministry of Home Affairs only if they seek financial support, including stipends for clergy, from the government. Registering with the ministry does not confer tax benefits. To register, religious groups must supply contact information, a history of their group, and addresses for houses of worship. Most religious groups are officially registered.The law does not permit religious instruction in public schools, and the government prohibits prayer groups in public schools. Private schools managed by religious groups include religious instruction in the curriculum. All students attending schools run by religious groups must take part in religious instruction, regardless of their religious background. Laws and government decrees do not permit parents to homeschool children for religious reasons.The government funds salaries for all teachers and support staff in primary and junior secondary schools established and managed by various religious groups. Additionally, the schools receive a subsidy for their operational costs based on the number of students. The government also provides 90 percent of funding for books and other materials. Religious groups must provide the remaining funding, which includes construction costs, funding for school furniture, supplies, and additional maintenance expenses. Religious organizations administer approximately 50 percent of primary (ages 4-12) and junior secondary (ages 12-16) schools in the country. Religious organizations do not administer higher secondary schools (ages 16-19). The Catholic Diocese of Paramaribo, Moravian Church, and Hindu community administer most private schools. Through the Ministries of Education and Finance, the government provides a fee per registered child and pays teacher salaries to the religious organizations administering these schools.The country is a party to the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights.																																				Government Practices										According to the Ministry of Social Affairs, budget constraints and the Ministry of Finance’s lengthy processes continued to hamper the government’s capacity to meet its payment obligations to homes for children as well as the elderly administered by religious organizations. According to religious organizations, the limited funding the government did provide arrived late and had to be supplemented by the different organizations. The government, through the Ministry of Education, continued its subsidies to schools managed by religious organizations at the same level as prior years. Religious organizations reported that the funds they did receive for maintenance of schools was far from sufficient and led to the deterioration of school buildings because they were unable to fund maintenance from their own budgets. The government prohibited schools receiving public funds, including religious schools, from increasing school fees for the 2022-23 school year.The armed forces continued to maintain a staff chaplaincy with Hindu, Muslim, Protestant, and Catholic clergy available to military personnel.The Religious Affairs Department of the Ministry of Home Affairs continued to support different religious groups by providing stipends to all registered clergy, which number several hundred from across all religions.According to government officials and IRIS leaders, the government collaborated with IRIS and the CCK, the latter comprising the Catholic Church, the Moravian Church, the Lutheran Church, and evangelical Christian Churches, on implementation of elements of its economic recovery program aimed at combatting poverty.The government allocated SRD 26 million ($820,000) of the budget to the economic recovery program it launched in May. In May and June, IRIS and the CCK provided support to 5,000 families through vouchers, direct cash, or food packages. Recipients did not have to be members of any religious group to apply for support. A representative of the Ministry of Finance said the government chose IRIS and the CCK as partners because of their existing networks and their cost-effective implementation mechanisms.During the year, the government consulted with different religious groups and organizations on proposed amendments to the country’s civil code. For example, the government consulted with religious leaders on changes to the civil code that would allow same-sex marriage, changes that IRIS said its religious groups would not support. Religious groups associated with IRIS and the CCK provided comments, suggested changes, and advised the government on the potential impact of proposed amendments.A program on standardizing and formally recognizing religious training launched by the Religious Affairs Department of the Ministry of Home Affairs in 2021 continued, with the addition of the involvement of the Ministry of Education. According to the Ministry of Home Affairs, formal recognition of religious training programs and their standardization would allow the ministry to set stipends for clergy under the government wage system. During the year, clergy received training through their respective organizations.Government officials continued to raise the importance of religious freedom, respect for religious diversity, and their commitment to protecting religious minorities through public statements, attendance at religious events, and hosting events in honor of various religious holidays. President Santokhi and other government officials emphasized the country’s religious diversity and the importance of respect for that diversity during public speeches. During the year, the President’s Office hosted events in commemoration of various religious holidays, including a September multidenominational prayer in honor of National Day of Fellowship and Unity. In October, during the celebration of the Hindu holiday Sri Shiv Parthiv Pujan Samaroh, the President stated, “In difficult times people draw strength from their religious values and beliefs, and Suriname is in the fortunate position to have multiple religions to draw from.”																																					Section III.													 Status of Societal Respect for Religious Freedom												    																																															IRIS continued to discuss interfaith activities and positions on government policies and their impact on society. IRIS collaborated with nonmember religious organizations such as the CCK on efforts to promote religious freedom and tolerance. In January, representatives of different religious organizations, as well as the Ministry of Home Affairs, collaborated on an event that the Baha’i Faith community organized in honor of World Religion Day.Leaders of the SIV mosque noted the general respect that individuals in the country have for each other’s religion. During a December discussion on religious freedom, representatives of different religious groups reinforced the mutual respect for each other’s religions, adding that “for Surinamers, it is normal.” Representatives from both the SIV mosque and the adjoining Neveh Shalom Synagogue reiterated their friendship and the general respect in the country for religious freedom.																																					Section IV.													 U.S. Government Policy and Engagement												    																																															U.S. embassy officials highlighted U.S. government policy on the importance of protection of religious freedom in meetings with government officials, including during the Chargé d’Affaires’s meeting with the Minister of Foreign Affairs in December. During the year, the Ambassador participated in different events hosted by the government that highlighted the country’s multireligious culture and promoted religious freedom and tolerance.In September, the Ambassador visited the Jodensavane, a historic Jewish site supported by the Ambassador’s Fund for Cultural Preservation, where she emphasized the site’s uniqueness as the first independent Jewish settlement in the Americas. In August, embassy officials visited the SIV’s mosque and met with its leaders to discuss religious freedom. In December, a senior Department of State official visited the country and delivered remarks on U.S. respect for religious freedom during a meeting with members of IRIS. The official stated, “U.S respect for religious freedom is a basic principle that does not depend on the nature of government.” He also visited the SIV mosque and adjoining Neveh Shalom Synagogue, where he discussed the country’s religious tolerance and diversity with their leaders.The embassy posted messages of greetings on all religious holidays on Facebook, the country’s primary social media platform.																																				    							View report by:																				Afghanistan											Albania											Algeria											Andorra											Angola											Antigua and Barbuda											Argentina											Armenia											Australia											Austria											Azerbaijan											Bahamas, The											Bahrain											Bangladesh											Barbados											Belarus											Belgium											Belize											Benin											Bhutan											Bolivia											Bosnia and Herzegovina											Botswana											Brazil											Brunei											Bulgaria											Burkina Faso											Burma											Burundi											Cabo Verde											Cambodia											Cameroon											Canada											Central African Republic											Chad											Chile											China (Includes Hong Kong, Macau, Tibet, and Xinjiang)											Colombia											Comoros											Costa Rica											Cote d’Ivoire											Croatia											Cuba											Cyprus											Czech Republic											Democratic Republic of the Congo											Denmark											Djibouti											Dominica											Dominican Republic											Ecuador											Egypt											El Salvador											Equatorial Guinea											Eritrea											Estonia											Eswatini											Ethiopia											Fiji											Finland											France											Gabon											Gambia, The											Georgia											Germany											Ghana											Greece											Grenada											Guatemala											Guinea											Guyana											Guinea-Bissau											Haiti											Honduras											Hungary											Iceland											India											Indonesia											Iran											Iraq											Ireland											Israel, West Bank and Gaza											Italy											Jamaica											Japan											Jordan											Kazakhstan											Kenya											Kiribati											Kosovo											Kuwait											Kyrgyzstan											Laos											Latvia											Lebanon											Lesotho											Liberia											Libya											Liechtenstein											Lithuania											Luxembourg											Madagascar											Malawi											Malaysia											Maldives											Mali											Malta											Marshall Islands											Mauritania											Mauritius											Mexico											Micronesia											Moldova											Monaco											Mongolia											Montenegro											Morocco											Mozambique											Namibia											Nauru											Nepal											Netherlands											New Zealand											Nicaragua											Niger											Nigeria											North Korea											North Macedonia											Norway											Oman											Pakistan											Palau											Panama											Papua New Guinea											Paraguay											Peru											Philippines											Poland											Portugal											Qatar											Republic of the Congo											Romania											Russia											Rwanda											Saint Kitts and Nevis											Saint Lucia											Saint Vincent and the Grenadines											Samoa											San Marino											Sao Tome and Principe											Saudi Arabia											Senegal											Serbia											Seychelles											Sierra Leone											Singapore											Slovakia											Slovenia											Solomon Islands											Somalia											South Africa											South Sudan											South Korea											Spain											Sri Lanka											Sudan											Suriname											Sweden											Switzerland											Syria											Taiwan											Tajikistan											Tanzania											Thailand											Timor-Leste											Togo											Tonga											Trinidad and Tobago											Tunisia											Turkey (Türkiye)											Turkmenistan											Tuvalu											Uganda											Ukraine											United Arab Emirates											United Kingdom											Uruguay											Uzbekistan											Vanuatu											Venezuela											Vietnam											Vietnam											Yemen											Zambia											Zimbabwe															Build A Custom Report																						On This Page				search													>																										Executive Summary																Section I. Religious Demography																																																	Section II. Status of Government Respect for Religious Freedom																																							Legal Framework																																																						Government Practices																																																			Section III. Status of Societal Respect for Religious Freedom																																																	Section IV. U.S. Government Policy and Engagement																																																							Tags																					Bureau of Western Hemisphere Affairs																								Office of International Religious Freedom																																Religious Freedom																															Suriname
- Suriname (96-202) – Status of Forces Agreement Office of Treaty AffairsDefense: Status of ForcesEffected by Exchange of Notes at Paramaribo January 17 and February 2, 1996; entered into force February 2, 1996.