the Constitution of Suriname or other laws of Suriname. According to the Petitioners, the right to communal property is not a legal right under Suriname law, and so accordingly, there are no remedies, judicial or otherwise, specific to indigenous persons or generally applicable, designed to provide for recognition and recovery of the alleged victims’ traditional lands, territory and resources. In support of this contention, the Petitioners rely on previous findings of the Commission and the Inter-American Court of Human Rights.6 17. Despite the absence of this legal framework, the Petitioners contend that the Lower Marowijne Peoples have, since the late 1960s, been seeking State recognition of their property rights, but to no avail. The Petitioners cite the following examples of their endeavors in this regard: a) Petitions filed under the Constitution of Suriname. Article 22 (1) of Suriname’s Constitution provides that “Everyone has the right to submit written petitions to the competent authority”. Under this provision, the Lower Marowijne Peoples have submitted three petitions to State officials requesting the State to negotiate a settlement that recognizes and secures the Lower Marowijne indigenous peoples’ rights.”7 The Petitioners contend that the three petitions were submitted on January 12, 2003, March 22, 2004, and September 25, 2005. According to the Petitioners, the State has not formally responded to any of the petitions. b) Meetings with government officials. The Lower Marowijne Peoples met with the Ministers responsible for Regional Development and Natural Resources on three occasions: once in 2002 (when they presented a map of their territory) and twice in 2003 to discuss their concerns. Since these meetings, the Petitioners contend that the Lower Marowijne Peoples have heard nothing further from these State officials. c) Written complaints to the Minister and agency responsible for issuing land titles. The Petitioners allege that a letter was sent to the State Lands Office in December 2004 complaining about the issue of individual land titles to non-indigenous persons within the traditional territory of the Lower Marowijne Peoples. No response was received, according to the Petitioners. In May 2006, a letter was sent to the Minister responsible for issuing land titles, complaining about the issue of individual land titles and mining concessions within the traditional territory of the Lower Marowijne Peoples. Similarly, there was no response received, according to the Petitioners. d) Protest action. In 1976, the Lower Marowijne Peoples organized a 142-kilometer long “land rights” march from Albina to Paramaribo to protest against violations of their rights in connection with the Galibi Nature Reserve (established by the government) and the forced sub-division and allotment of the villages of Erowarte, Wan Shi Sha, Tapuku, and Pierrekondre. According to the Petitioners, the response of the State was expressed by a special commission known as the Commission on Entitlements to Land in the Interior, which stated that indigenous peoples had no rights to land and therefore no right to object.8 18. The Petitioners also cite other examples of collaborative efforts by indigenous people generally to secure recognition of their indigenous rights. These include: The Petitioners rely on I/A Court of H.R., Case of Moiwana Community. Judgment of June 15, 2005. Series C No. 124, where the Court stated at paragraph 86 (5) that “Although individual members of indigenous and tribal communities are considered natural persons by Suriname’s Constitution, the State’s legal framework does not recognize such communities as legal entities. Similarly, national legislation does not provide for collective rights”. The Petitioners also cite IACHR Report 09/06, Case 12.338, Twelve Saramaka Clans, Suriname, March 02, 2006, where the Commission found, at para. 230, that “indigenous and Maroon communities lack legal status in Suriname and are not eligible to receive communal titles on behalf of the community or other traditional collective entities that possess land.” 7 Petitioners’ petition, para. 33, page 8. 8 See Petitioners’ petition, para. 61, page 15. 6 4