Sylvana van den Braak

CENSORSHIP IN SURINAM

Eva Tas Foundation | Amsterdam

Dedication

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

Preface

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

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

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

Sylvana van den Braak

Amsterdam, May, 2017.

Introduction

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

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

Second home

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

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

Factors

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

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

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

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

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

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

Chapter 1 Blind Eyes

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

Colonial period

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

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

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

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

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

Surinam’s Independence and coup d’état

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

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

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

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

December murders

During the night of 7 to 8 December 1982, sixteen opponents of the military regime were apprehended and taken to Fort Zeelandia. Five journalists: Jozef Slagveer (director of news agency Informa), André Kamperveen (founder and director of Radio ABC), Bram Behr (journalist of Mokro), Leslie Rahman (reporter of De Ware Tijd and Wrokoman Powa – paper of C-47) and Frank Wijngaarde (Radio ABC) were tortured and murdered because they fought for freedom of expression. The same happened to ten other opponents of the regime.

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