11 to murder on a large scale; at least 39 individuals were killed in a space of a few hours on 29 November 1986. Over 70 per cent of those killed were below the age of 18; 25% were 5 years old or younger, including four infants under the age of 2; and 50% were women or girls (...). By all accounts they were defenceless (...). (...) The Moiwana massacre was not an isolated incident but rather part of a policy of widespread, systematic and collective reprisals against the civilian Maroon population for the activities of the Jungle Commando. Then Commander of the Army Désiré Bouterse stated on the radio in late 1986, for instance, that he would, - and I quote, - ‘kill all Maroons and find their planting grounds and bomb them’"34. 31. that And the same representative of the alleged victims went on to state before the Court "massacres were also reported in the Maroon villages of Morakondre, Moengotapoe, and Maroons were subject to forced starvation (...). During this time [1987] almost every Maroon village in Eastern Suriname was razed to the ground with the help of military aircraft. Some ten thousand people fled the area, and Maroon religious rites were routinely destroyed. In addition to the Moiwana massacre, reliable sources estimate that in November and December 1986 alone some 244 mostly Maroon civilians were murdered by the National Army. Finally, the Army unit responsible for the massacre was especially trained for the operation at Moiwana, indicating that the massacre was planned, calculated and deliberate. (...) We wish further to emphasize that the classification of the massacre as a crime against humanity, as a gross violation of humanitarian law and of jus cogens norms, (...) [and] Suriname's responsibility for the subsequent denial of justice (...). With respect to the denial of justice in this case, we believe that the facts speak for themselves. The testimony and other evidence presented to the Court demonstrate that the victims actively and repeatedly sought recourse in Suriname. These attempts to obtain justice were ignored, rebuffed and even chastised by Suriname and produced no result. (...) The intellectual authors, who are well known and who have publicly ackowledged their responsibility on more than one occasion, continue to enjoy complete impunity"35. 32. The facts do indeed speak for themselves. In the present Judgment, the Court recalled, as to the proven facts, inter alia, that the Army Commander of Suriname (D. Bouterse) had issued a statement to the press36 whereby he confirmed that "the operation in Moiwana village was a military action which he himself had ordered", and that "he would not allow military . From the recording and transcripts of the public hearing of 29.09.2004, deposited in the archives of the Inter-American Court. 34 . From the recording and transcripts of the public hearing of 29.09.2004, deposited in the archives of the Inter-American Court. 35 . On 21.04.1989. 36