19 clarify this situation, without obtaining a positive resolution.104 For instance, indigenous members of the Wan Shi Sha village attempted to stop a resident of Paramaribo from rebuilding his vacation home, which had been destroyed in the so-called Interior War, inside the village.105 They filed a complaint to stop the construction, but the Cantonal court ruled against them because the homeowner had formal title of his parcel, while rejecting the indigenous community’s claim of traditional ownership.106 On another occasion, the indigenous chiefs of the Lowe Marowijne River region filed a petition with the President of Suriname, pursuant to Article 22 of the Surinamese Constitution, to complain about certain activities by purported non-indigenous title holders in the village of Pierrekondre.107 The State did not respond to this petition. There is also a disagreement between the parties as to whether the indigenous peoples in the parceled areas still maintain a traditional way of life, as the petitioners claim,108 or have been assimilated with the non-indigenous population and no longer maintain a special relationship with their lands, as asserted by the State.109 The Inter-American Commission considers that there is sufficient evidence in this case to establish that the Kaliña and Lokono Peoples maintain their traditional way of life as indigenous peoples.110 In any event, the relevance of this determination will be discussed below at Section V.A. 64. F. Granting of Mining Concessions According to available information, in 1958 a bauxite mining concession was granted inside the Wane Kreek Reserve.111 Suralco N.V., a joint-venture between Alcoa and BHP65. 104 Annex 6. Petition, paras. 75-77; Annex 5. Submission of the petitioners, May 28, 2008, Annex E, “Traditional use and management of the Lower Marowijne area by the Kaliña and Lokono: A Surinamese case study in the context of article 10(c) of the Convention on Biological Diversity”, February 17, 2006, p. 106. 105 Annex 6. Petition, paras. 75-76. 106 Annex 6. Petition, para. 76, citing Tjan A Sjin v. Zaalman and Others, Cantonal Court, First Canton, Paramaribo, May 21, 1998; Submission of Suriname, September 12, 2008, Annex II, Affidavit of Rudy Emanuel Strijk, p. 1. 107 Annex 13. Submission of the petitioners, May 28, 2008, Annex A, Petition filed by petitioners pursuant to Article 22 of the Constitution of Suriname, October 7, 2007. 108 Submission of the petitioners, May 28, 2008, paras. 19-22. 109 Submission of Suriname, March 22, 2008, pp. 3-4. 110 See, e.g., Annex 24. Petition, Annex B, Petition by the Captains of Eight Lower Marowijne Indigenous Communities, including Tapuku, Pierrekondre, Erowarte; Annex 25. Peticion, Annex E, English Summary of Archival Research, explaining the history of the Kaliña and Lokono indigenous peoples; Annex 5. Submission of the petitioners, May 28, 2008, Annex E, Traditional use and management of the Lower Marowijne area by the Kaliña and Lokono: A Surinamese case study in the context of article 10(c) of the Convention on Biological Diversity, a 117-page report on the situation of the indigenous communities of the Lower Marowijne River; ; Submission of Suriname, March 22, 2008, pp. 3 (stating that “The people of Langamankondre and Christiaankondre who claim a unique relationship with the land of the Galibi Nature Reserve indeed have such a relationship with nature in the sense that their lives are connected with the periodic nesting activities of sea turtles in this territory”). 111 Submission of Suriname, September 12, 2008, p. 1, and Annex 21. Attachment III to Submission of Suriname, September 12, 2008, Affidavit of Glenn Renaldo Kingswijk; Petition, para. 140; Annex 8. Expert Report of Dr. Stuart Kirsch, November 25, 2010, pp. 11-12.