Voters in Suriname to choose government to helm predicted oil boom
Suriname's opposition leader Jennifer Geerlings-Simons of the National Democratic Party (NDP) is interviewed during a campaign event with young supporters ahead of the May 25 National Assembly election, in Paramaribo, Suriname May 20, 2025. REUTERS/Ranu Abhelakh
Suriname's Defense Minister Krishna Mathoera, of the ruling Progressive Reform Party (VHP), campaigns ahead of the May 25 National Assembly election, in Paramaribo, Suriname May 21, 2025. REUTERS/Ranu Abhelakh
Suriname's Defense Minister Krishna Mathoera, of the ruling Progressive Reform Party (VHP), looks on during a campaign, ahead of the May 25 National Assembly election, in Paramaribo, Suriname May 21, 2025. REUTERS/Ranu Abhelakh
FILE PHOTO: Suriname's President Chan Santokhi bikes with supporters, who received bikes with his name on them for free, during a campaign event ahead of the May 25 National Assembly election, in Paramaribo, Suriname May 18, 2025. REUTERS/Ranu Abhelakh/File Photo
FILE PHOTO: Suriname's opposition leader Jennifer Geerlings-Simons of the National Democratic Party (NDP) attends a campaign event with young supporters ahead of the May 25 National Assembly election, in Paramaribo, Suriname May 20, 2025. REUTERS/Ranu Abhelakh/File Photo
PARAMARIBO, Suriname - Voters in Suriname, which is on the cusp of a predicted oil boom, will go to the polls on Sunday to elect a new parliament, which will later choose the South American country's next president.
The contest, marked by fraud allegations, has seen little debate about what the next government, which will hold power until 2030, should do with income from the offshore oil and gas Gran Morgu project, set to begin production in 2028.
The project, led by TotalEnergies, is Suriname's first major offshore effort. The former Dutch colony, independent since 1975, discovered reserves that may allow it to compete with neighbor Guyana - whose economy grew 43.6% last year - as a prominent producer.
The party with the most seats will lead Suriname's next government, likely through a coalition with smaller parties, but negotiations and the choosing of a new president are expected to take weeks.
Potential presidential nominees from the ruling Progressive Reform Party (VHP) include President Chan Santokhi and Defense Minister Krishna Mathoera. The National Democratic Party (NDP) - founded by former President Desi Bouterse, who died a fugitive last year - could back party head Jennifer Simons, former Vice President Ashwin Adhin or Bouterse's widow, Ingrid Bouterse.
Just under 400,000 voters, from the country's coast to its jungle hinterlands, are eligible to elect 51 national lawmakers and 784 regional representatives. Voter turnout historically hovers around 75%.
Santokhi, who led a 1,700-person bike ride in Paramaribo on Sunday after handing out orange bicycles emblazoned with "Chan" on the frame, has not ruled out cooperation with any party.
"We cannot say: Cooperate with those, don't cooperate with those," the 66-year-old Santokhi, a former police commissioner, said on television on Wednesday. "Because ultimately the people decide what those parties are going to get in votes."
COMING OIL REVENUE
Opposition NDP party leader Simons, 71, has told Dutch media she believes the government is preparing a "massive fraud" and that polling showing a potential VHP lead is part of the plot.
Simons, a doctor who served as speaker of parliament for a decade until 2020, has said NDP polling shows the party will win more than double the votes of the VHP, whose leaders have scoffed at the fraud allegations.
A poll commissioned by the Times of Suriname showed 39.4% support for the NDP and 21.5% for the VHP, while a poll by LC Media showed the VHP three seats ahead, with 17 seats.
Bouterse and the NDP dominated Surinamese politics for decades. He left office in 2020, the same year he was convicted in the 1982 murders of 15 government critics.
When the conviction was upheld in 2023, Bouterse went into hiding, dying at 79 at an unknown location on Christmas Eve.
His widow, Ingrid, 64, is on NDP's parliamentary list and active in campaigning, regularly polling her Facebook followers on whether she should serve in parliament or be president.
Parties have made general promises to improve health, education and diversify the economy, but civil society coalition the Citizens' Initiative for Participation and Good Governance (BINI) said in a Wednesday report they have failed to offer specifics about oil revenue spending.
"None of the parties has a clear and concrete plan for the revenues from the Gran Morgu project," BINI said, though it said promises may not matter much when it comes to coalition negotiations.
"It is mainly about dividing the cake - who gets which positions or ministries - not about what is best for the country," BINI said. REUTERS
Join ST's Telegram channel and get the latest breaking news delivered to you.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Straits Times
19 minutes ago
- Straits Times
Intense Russian drone attack on Kharkiv kills 2, injures 38, Ukraine says
KHARKIV - A nine-minute-long Russian drone attack on Ukraine's second largest city of Kharkiv killed at least two people and injured 38, including five children, regional officials said on Wednesday. The intense strikes with 17 drones sparked fires in 15 units of a five-storey apartment building and caused other damage in the city close to the Russian border, Kharkiv Mayor Ihor Terekhov said. "There are direct hits on multi-storey buildings, private homes, playgrounds, enterprises and public transport," Terekhov said on the Telegram messaging app. "Apartments are burning, roofs are destroyed, cars are burnt, windows are broken." A Reuters witness saw emergency rescuers helping to carry people out of damaged buildings, administering care and firefighters battling blazes in the dark. Nine of the injured, including a 2-year-old girl and a 15-year-old boy, have been hospitalised, Oleh Sinehubov, the governor of the broader Kharkiv region, said on Telegram. He added that the strikes hit also a city trolley bus depot and several residential buildings. There was no immediate comment from Russia. Kharkiv, in Ukraine's northeast, withstood Russian full-scale advance in the early days of the war and has since been a frequent target of air assaults. The attack followed Russia's two biggest assaults of the war on Ukraine this week, a part of intensified bombardments that Moscow said were retaliatory measures for Kyiv's recent attacks in Russia. Both sides deny targeting civilians in the war that Russia launched on its smaller neighbour in February 2022. But thousands of civilians have died in the conflict, the vast majority of them Ukrainian. "We are holding on. We are helping each other. And we will definitely survive," Terekhov said. "Kharkiv is Ukraine. And it cannot be broken." REUTERS Join ST's Telegram channel and get the latest breaking news delivered to you.
Straits Times
19 minutes ago
- Straits Times
Trump tariffs may remain in effect while appeals proceed, US appeals court decides
The appeals court has yet to rule on whether the tariffs are permissible under an emergency economic powers act that Mr Trump cited. PHOTO: REUTERS WASHINGTON - A federal appeals court allowed President Donald Trump's most sweeping tariffs to remain in effect on June 10 while it reviews a lower court decision blocking them on grounds that Mr Trump had exceeded his authority by imposing them. The decision by the US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit in Washington, DC means Mr Trump may continue to enforce, for now, his 'Liberation Day' tariffs on imports from most US trading partners, as well as a separate set of tariffs levied on Canada, China and Mexico. The appeals court has yet to rule on whether the tariffs are permissible under an emergency economic powers act that Mr Trump cited to justify them, but it allowed the tariffs to remain in place while the appeals play out. The tariffs, used by Mr Trump as negotiating leverage with US trading partners, and their on-again, off-again nature have shocked markets and whipsawed companies of all sizes as they seek to manage supply chains, production, staffing and prices. The ruling has no impact on other tariffs levied under more traditional legal authority, such as tariffs on steel and aluminium imports. A three-judge panel of the US Court of International Trade ruled on May 28 that the US Constitution gave Congress, not the president, the power to levy taxes and tariffs, and that the president had exceeded his authority by invoking the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA), a law intended to address 'unusual and extraordinary' threats during national emergencies. The Trump administration quickly appealed the ruling, and the Federal Circuit in Washington put the lower court decision on hold the next day while it considered whether to impose a longer-term pause. The ruling came in a pair of lawsuits, one filed by the nonpartisan Liberty Justice Centre on behalf of five small US businesses that import goods from countries targeted by the duties and the other by 12 US states. Mr Trump has claimed broad authority to set tariffs under IEEPA. The 1977 law has historically been used to impose sanctions on enemies of the US or freeze their assets. Mr Trump is the first US president to use it to impose tariffs. Mr Trump has said that the tariffs imposed in February on Canada, China and Mexico were to fight illegal fentanyl trafficking at US borders, denied by the three countries, and that the across-the-board tariffs on all US trading partners imposed in April were a response to the US trade deficit. The states and small businesses had argued the tariffs were not a legal or appropriate way to address those matters, and the small businesses argued that the decades-long US practice of buying more goods than it exports does not qualify as an emergency that would trigger IEEPA. At least five other court cases have challenged the tariffs justified under the emergency economic powers act, including other small businesses and the state of California. One of those cases, in federal court in Washington, DC, also resulted in an initial ruling against the tariffs, and no court has yet backed the unlimited emergency tariff authority Mr Trump has claimed. REUTERS Join ST's Telegram channel and get the latest breaking news delivered to you.
Straits Times
23 minutes ago
- Straits Times
Trump tariffs may remain in effect while appeals proceed, U.S. Appeals court decides
FILE PHOTO: U.S. President Donald Trump holds a chart next to U.S. Secretary of Commerce Howard Lutnick as Trump delivers remarks on tariffs in the Rose Garden at the White House in Washington, D.C., U.S., April 2, 2025. REUTERS/Carlos Barria/File Photo A federal appeals court allowed President Donald Trump's most sweeping tariffs to remain in effect on Tuesday while it reviews a lower court decision blocking them on grounds that Trump had exceeded his authority by imposing them. The decision by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit in Washington, D.C. means Trump may continue to enforce, for now, his "Liberation Day" tariffs on imports from most U.S. trading partners, as well as a separate set of tariffs levied on Canada, China and Mexico. The appeals court has yet to rule on whether the tariffs are permissible under an emergency economic powers act that Trump cited to justify them, but it allowed the tariffs to remain in place while the appeals play out. The tariffs, used by Trump as negotiating leverage with U.S. trading partners, and their on-again, off-again nature have shocked markets and whipsawed companies of all sizes as they seek to manage supply chains, production, staffing and prices. The ruling has no impact on other tariffs levied under more traditional legal authority, such as tariffs on steel and aluminum imports. A three-judge panel of the U.S. Court of International Trade ruled on May 28 that the U.S. Constitution gave Congress, not the president, the power to levy taxes and tariffs, and that the president had exceeded his authority by invoking the International Emergency Economic Powers Act, a law intended to address "unusual and extraordinary" threats during national emergencies. The Trump administration quickly appealed the ruling, and the Federal Circuit in Washington put the lower court decision on hold the next day while it considered whether to impose a longer-term pause. The ruling came in a pair of lawsuits, one filed by the nonpartisan Liberty Justice Center on behalf of five small U.S. businesses that import goods from countries targeted by the duties and the other by 12 U.S. states. Trump has claimed broad authority to set tariffs under IEEPA. The 1977 law has historically been used to impose sanctions on enemies of the U.S. or freeze their assets. Trump is the first U.S. president to use it to impose tariffs. Trump has said that the tariffs imposed in February on Canada, China and Mexico were to fight illegal fentanyl trafficking at U.S. borders, denied by the three countries, and that the across-the-board tariffs on all U.S. trading partners imposed in April were a response to the U.S. trade deficit. The states and small businesses had argued the tariffs were not a legal or appropriate way to address those matters, and the small businesses argued that the decades-long U.S. practice of buying more goods than it exports does not qualify as an emergency that would trigger IEEPA. At least five other court cases have challenged the tariffs justified under the emergency economic powers act, including other small businesses and the state of California. One of those cases, in federal court in Washington, D.C., also resulted in an initial ruling against the tariffs, and no court has yet backed the unlimited emergency tariff authority Trump has claimed. REUTERS Join ST's Telegram channel and get the latest breaking news delivered to you.
