24 The State must right the wrongs that it has committed; it must address the situation in an appropriate way, “before we can return to normalcy.” Since the attack, the witness’ life “has been completely disturbed”; she feels that she has been in the same situation since the events of November 29, 1986. Furthermore, the community may require assistance to return to Moiwana Village; she personally has not gone back yet at all. In any event, the witness is willing to return to live at Moiwana “if everything […] is done properly” according to tradition, since her current location in French Guiana, she states, “is not my place.” The witness never understood the reason for the attack. She stated that “it is important for me – I would like to know why. […] It is essential to know, because that is the law […] in the tradition of the N’djuka culture. […] Our rights have to be observed.” Also with regard to potential reparations, the witness added that everything which would bring their lives back to normal is “welcome,” such as compensation and being provided somewhere to live. d) Andre Ajintoena, former Moiwana Village resident and chairman of Association Moiwana The witness was present at Moiwana Village during the events of November 29, 1986; his sisters and their children were killed during the massacre. He stated that “those killed in Moiwana, one could say, they are all family members.” In the N’djuka culture it is “essential” to search for justice when someone dies in an unjust way. This obligation “to set things straight,” if not fulfilled, will cause the living as well as the dead to suffer. The witness himself has established a group dedicated to obtaining justice, Association Moiwana, which has collaborated with Moiwana ’86 since the attack. In this way, the survivors first tried, in coordination with Moiwana ’86, to obtain justice using domestic options; however, as soon as they realized it was not possible on that level, they decided to appeal to the international recourses available to them. Association Moiwana has members in French Guiana as well as in Suriname. Whenever any important decision is to be taken with regard to the present case, all of Moiwana’s survivors and next of kin are consulted through the efforts of the Association. Thus, the Association conducts regular meetings; in fact, before the public hearing the witness once again met with the Moiwana survivors and next of kin in French Guiana and Suriname. The witness and Association Moiwana did all that they could to cooperate with the Surinamese government, although during Inspector Gooding’s investigation the internal armed conflict impeded the witness and others from traveling to Paramaribo to talk with Gooding. In fact, the police have never taken a statement from the witness regarding the Moiwana case. After the death of Gooding, many people thought it would not be possible to proceed at all with the investigation. With regard to the discovery of bodies near Moiwana in 1993, the government never informed the survivors about the final results of its exhumation. Furthermore, the survivors specifically wrote to the State to request an