NDP parliamentarian Patrick Kensenhuis tells the media that we shouldn’t reopen old wounds after the Constitutional Court found that the Amnesty Act violates both the Constitution and the several human rights treaties to which Suriname is a party. An amnesty bill was necessary because of the situation in the nation at the time. What should be done now that the Amnesty Act as it has been adopted has been declared non-binding?
“That is what we have to prevent, the social unrest, creating uncertainty in the country. We should not wet dry wounds and that is what is happening at the moment”. Kensenhuis indicates that he is not in favor of legislation that has been made to create a certain peace or situation that creates that uncertainty. “I hope that peace remains.” Looking at certain legal products only to destroy them and create unrest is currently not good for Suriname, according to Kensenhuis. “I don’t think it’s necessary to pull on things that were basically silent.”
We must look at how the production sector can be strengthened and how the agricultural sector can be strengthened so that the country can be further developed. “Instead of looking at how we can get together, business is being done to tear us apart and that’s not good.” At the time of the events, a lot of people have suffered damage and we need to look at how that damage can be repaired. There are a number of judgments where the state of Suriname or the government is forced to indicate content. “I don’t know if removing amnesty has a good relationship with repairing damage.” If people are locked up after so many years, the damage will not be repaired, according to Kensenhuis.