Previous 13 / 27 Next

Tabel 2. Procentuele groei van de populatie per district per verkiezingsjaar tov 1987 aantal zetels 1987 Paramaribo 17 Wanica 7 Nickerie 2015 in aantallen 1991 1996 2000 2005 2010 2020 1987 2020 1 5% 13% 24% 32% 33% 1 17% 18% 20% 45% 78% 24% 27% 184323 233448 103% 127% 59251 134479 5 1 33% 26% 17% 31% 24% 13% 13% 27967 31692 Coronie 2 1 15% 6% 2% 3% 3% 0% 5% 2735 2873 Saramacca 3 1 7% 11% 15% 40% 43% 41% 46% 11498 16844 Commewijne 4 1 26% 20% 14% 36% 55% 64% 80% 18146 32664 Marowijne 3 1 15% 1% -15% 4% 11% 20% 25% 16010 20019 Para 3 1 35% 42% 49% 86% 118% 154% 183% 10170 28815 Brokopondo 3 1 -13% -16% -16% 53% 37% 57% 65% 8684 14301 Sipaliwini Totaal landelijk 4 1 -2% -7% -12% 4% 19% 26% 31% 27034 35438 51 1 10% 13% 17% 33% 41% 43% 51% 365818 550573 Tabel 2 geeft de procentuele groei van de populatie naar district per verkiezingsjaar. Het gaat hier om veranderde aantallen per district uitgedrukt in een percentage van de populatie per district in 1987 De percentages geven de groei aan van de populatie op districtsniveau. Vergeleken met 1987 is de populatie van Paramaribo in 1991 gegroeid met 5%, met 13% in 1996, [...] en met 27% in 2020. Voor Wanica is het aantal van 1987 zijnde 59.251 gestegen naar 134.479 in 2020, een procentuele groei van 127% Voor Sipaliwini is het aantal gegroeid van 27.034 naar 35,438 personen, zijnde een groei van 31% De vergelijking van de verschillende verkiezingsjaren met het jaar 1987 laat zowel positieve als negatieve groeipercentages zien op districtsniveau voor de jaren 1991-2000. Vanaf 2005 tot 2020 is er steeds een positieve groei t.o.v. 1987 op districtsniveau. Landelijk is de populatie gegroeid van 365.818 in 1987 naar 550.573 in 2020, zijnde een groei van circa 51%30 Met dank aan R. Sobhie van het Institute for Graduate Studies and Research, Anton de Kom Universiteit van Suriname. Bron: Cijfers van het Centraal Burau voor Burgerzaken van 13 juli 2022 over de verkiezingsjaren 1987, 1991, 1996, 2000, 2005, 2010, 2015 en 2020. 30 Met dank aan R. Sobhie van het Institute for Graduate Studies and Research, Anton de Kom Universiteit van Suriname. Page 13 of 27

Select target paragraph3

● ● ●

CH-02

Judgment

Question Presented: Are elements of the national electoral code that define allotment of legislative seats across the country's 10 districts (based off population patterns and anticipated growth in 1987) in conflict with the Constitution, the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, the American Convention of Human Rights, and the Universal Declaration of Human Rights?

Alleged Acts: The petition filer alleged that Suriname's electoral law led to voter inequality. She cited that rural votes carried significantly more weight than urban votes, as legislative seats were allotted based on population distribution and anticipated growth patterns when the electoral law was first passed in 1987. These allotments failed to account for population growth (particularly in urban areas) in the more than 30 years that had passed since the election law was passed.

Procedural history: Ms. Serena Muntslag-Essed, a lawyer admitted to the bar in Surname, submitted a petition to the Constitutional Court on March 7, 2022.

Summary: Seats within the National Assembly were apportioned across 10 districts within the 1987 Electoral Law, based on the principle of 'positive discrimination' (which allotted more votes to districts that were lagging behind in development and population growth). In the intervening decades, uneven patterns of population growth across the country contributed to a significant imbalance in the weight of individual votes in determining the make up of the Parliament, disadvantaging urban residents in particular. The Constitutional Court found the district-based seat allotments established in the electoral law were no longer permitted, as they conflicted with select articles of the Constitution and Suriname's commitments under the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, and the American Convention on Human Rights.

Conclusion: The court ruled that articles of the electoral law (allotting legislative seats across 10 districts based on population density and anticipated growth in 1987) failed to comply with the principles of equality and prohibition of discrimination enshrined in the Constitution, Article 25(b) of the ICCPR, and articles 23 (1)(b) and (24) of the American Convention on Human Rights. The Court also found that the legality of the seat allotment could not be tested against the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, due to its non-binding nature.

Legal Issue(s)

Electoral Maps and Districting

Applicable Law(s): Constitution; Electoral Law; International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights: American Convention on Human Rights; Universal Declaration of Human Rights;

Region: Americas

Country: Suriname

Language of Decision

Dutch

Court: Constitutional Court

Election Type: Review of law

Date of decision: Aug 5, 2022

Geolocation

Latitude: 3.604431570977407

Longitude: -55.71386933326722

: Geolocation

Primary Documents

CH-02-Besluit-CHof-Afschrift-1.pdf
Dutch
Download View

Election Judgments - IFES

Select target paragraph3

CH-02

Primary Documents

Notifications