SITUATION ANALYSIS OF THE SMALL-SCALE GOLD ... - WWF

Furthermore, the proposed Inter Department Units‟ (IDU), which were to include
representatives of the various ministries as well as police and military never materialized,
and the responsibility for SSM issues - including regulation, control, health, and labor-
lies with a variety of Ministries and Departments. A lack of communication and
collaboration between these institutions is also hampering SSM regulation.
Of all stakeholders, the State is the greatest loser, but also invests the least into the subsector.
According to the report of the National Planning Office between 1995 and 200,1
the State collected less than one percent of the gross production value of gold in
Suriname (SPS 2002:20), based on estimates of the Suriname Planning Foundation
(Stichting Planbureau Suriname; SPS) while it should recuperate about 16% of the gross
production in turn-over taxes, fees and royalties.. 3 If the SSGM sub-sector could be
transformed from an informal to a formal sub-sector, the State would be the greatest
beneficiary both in terms of revenue and improved management. Regrettably, the lack of
confidence in the sub-sector has discouraged the administration from investing greater
effort and resources into the sub-sector.
With regard to mining authorities, “lack of adequate operational resources prevents
officials from enforcing existing regulations. The inability to enforce existing regulations
results in illegal operations, poor environment, health, and safety standards and a loss of
fiscal revenues from this activity. The lack of funds from fiscal revenues limits the ability
of the government to perform its regulatory function and perpetuates uncontrolled
artisanal mining.”
Taxes from SSM can also contribute to further economic development of the country.
Efforts to collect taxes directly from the small-scale gold miners in Suriname have not
been successful in the past. The operation, named Goldfinger (1997-1999) came under
heavy scrutiny from miners, the media, and the Suriname public, and did not bring the
expected results.
Further, current national legislation with regard to SSGM is outdated. The draft Mining
Act of 2002 provides for better protection of the environment and of workers in SSM
than is the case in the Mining Decree of 1986. The proposed provisions regarding the
rights of Indigenous peoples and Maroons, however continue to negate their rights as
stipulated under international law. If accepted, this omission is likely to become a source
of conflict between forest peoples –including local miners, who claim customary rights to
the land, and the holders of formal mining rights.
On November 15, 2004, the Association of Village Chiefs in Suriname (Vereniging van
Inheemse Dorpshoofden in Suriname; VIDS) submitted a petition to protest the draft
Mining Law.. Calling the law discriminatory, the Indigenous representatives protest the
3 The estimate depends on whether one uses the conservative production estimate, sixtons per year (tpy), or
the optimistic estimate, 12 tpy. Suriname exports 12 tons of gold per year, but information from gold
buyers and recent arrests of gold smugglers suggest that a substantial share in smuggled in from Guyana
and French Guyana.
xi