Wildlife in Suriname has not been given an independent legal status but is categorized as a natural resource. The Constitution and other laws do not specify if natural resources encompass both terrestrial species and fishes, but since there is no legal indication to the contrary, it can be presumed. According to the Constitution, natural riches and resources are property of the nation and shall be used to promote economic, social and cultural development. The Constitution further states that one of the social objectives of the State is “…creating and improving the necessary conditions for the protection of nature and for the preservation of the ecological balance”. From the different laws on Suriname’s natural resources, such as the Game Act 1954, the Fish Stock Protection Act, and the Forest Management Act, it can be concluded that the State is responsible for their regulation and management. This qualifies as a trusteeship where the Government is vested with managing the natural resources including wildlife. 

The Game Act 1954 aims to protect animals living in the wild by regulating hunting activities. By law, hunting licences are required in order to perform any type of hunting activity. Only the animal species that fall under the game species, cage animal species and predominantly harmful species are allowed to be hunted. The Game State Order 2002 lists the species belonging to the aforementioned categories, including an additional category of protected species. It also determines the open and closed seasons for hunting or catching, and bag limits (i.e. the maximum number of designated species that a person is permitted by law to take or acquire on a hunting trip) for hunting.

Hunting and fishing are allowed on the grounds and waters that belong to the State, on concession areas, in community forests and on private grounds with permission from the landowner. These activities must comply with closed and open seasons, and specific and/or prescriptive methods required for fishing and hunting.

Indigenous and tribal peoples’ rights over the land and natural resources (including wildlife) are not expressly recognized in the Surinamese legislation. Sectoral laws only very briefly refer to “the rights of indigenous and tribal people” and there are no further provisions or specifications on what these rights are specifically, and how they can be enforced:
•    The Decree on Land Policy Principles (L-1) states that when the Government issues land titles, the rights of indigenous and tribal peoples to their villages, settlements and agricultural plots are respected insofar as these rights are not contrary to the general interest. General interest refers to the implementation of any project within the framework of an approved development plan. 
•    The Mining Act provides that anyone applying for a mining exploration right must list all tribal communities located in or near the plot of interest. However, this provision does not establish how this required information will be used. 
•    The Forest Management Act indicates that the Minister in charge of forest management can designate certain forest areas as communal forest on behalf of the forest dwellers who live in villages and settlements, and also for the tribal people after consultation with the Minister responsible for Regional Development. In addition, the Act states that the customary laws of the tribal inhabitants of the interior in their villages and settlements and on their agricultural plots shall be respected as much as possible. Violations of the customary laws of these inhabitants can be appealed in writing to the President.
•    The Nature Conservation State Order 1986 states that the rights of villages and settlements of the tribal communities, which are understood to include land and wildlife tenure (including subsistence hunting), remain in force. However, while the  Explanatory Memorandum of the State Order states that the surrounding forest dwellers living in tribal communities will maintain their traditional rights and claims, these traditional rights are not defined. Moreover, according to the legal system, tribal peoples have no legal personality. Hence, tribal communities can only seek justice as individual persons. This provision is limited to four specific protected areas, namely Peruvia Nature Reserve, Wanekreek Nature Reserve, Copie Nature Reserve and Boven Coesewijne Nature Reserve. Therefore, indigenous people and local communities (IPLCs) living outside these reserves are excluded. 
•    The Nature Conservation State Order, which in 1998 established the Central Suriname Nature Reserve, Suriname’s largest nature reserve, stipulates that the “acquired rights” of tribal forest dwellers from the villages and settlements located in the nature reserve will be respected unless the general interest or the national goal of the established nature reserve is harmed or except if otherwise is provided. The law does not specify which acquired rights it covers. Moreover, it is not clear whether these rights concern customary rights.
•    The Game State Order 2002 also has a protection clause for IPLCs. The Explanatory Memorandum states that due to the protein supply and the low population density in the remote interior, hunting for game and cage animals in the Southern Zone is open during the whole year, with no bag limits. A restriction in the law has been included, however, for the Northern Zone. No one is allowed to hunt for species for which hunting is forbidden throughout the year. Due to the issuances of many timber concessions in the southern area of the country, many roads have opened up, which makes the interior far more accessible than it was a few years ago. This can lead to the misuse of the open hunting season, with no bag limits in the Southern Zone.
•    The new Environmental Framework Act, which is the most recent piece of legislation, states that the National Environmental Authority (NMA) needs to ensure that the Free, Prior and Informed Consent (FPIC) principle is applied in decision-making affecting the living area and habitats of the indigenous and tribal peoples. However, provisions on involving IPLCs are only very briefly addressed under the current legal framework.

Overall, provisions that ensure the representation of the different interests and needs of men and women as well as their equal participation can be found in the Constitution, which grants the right to equal protection and the prohibition of discrimination, including gender-related. However, these provisions are not reflected in sectoral legislation regarding wildlife and fisheries. 

Violations of the wildlife tenure regime are punishable by a maximum of three month of imprisonment or a maximum fine of 10 000 guilders.

The current legislation with regard to land and inland water use planning is very limited, outdated and scattered across various laws and regulations, and therefore administered by different ministries. 
The main act on land-use planning in rural areas is the Planning Act 1973, which sets out rules and regulations with regard to national and regional planning in the interest of sound spatial planning, including land and waters. However, this law has not been effective due to the non-establishment of the required planning institutes, the Planning Coordination Commission and the Planning Council. Currently, Suriname lacks a national land use plan.
Although the Planning Act does not refer to wildlife as such, there is a provision for designating areas as special management areas (i.e. for wildlife conservation). However, these areas have never been established under this Act.
The Mining Act and the Forest Management Act provide for a land use plan scheme; the Forest Management Act designates different types of forests, which should be in conformity with national and regional plans, and the Mining Act provides for the designation of areas for small-scale mining. It is noteworthy to mention that none of these laws require wildlife inventories. 
The Forest Management Act provides for the classification of forest, but a declassification is absent. The Act indicates that the forest can be divided into permanent forest, conversion forest, forest to be temporarily maintained, and communal forests. The permanent forests, which include production, protected, and special protected forests, are subject to sustainable management. Finally, the Act establishes that the Minister responsible for forest management can designate certain forest areas as communal forest on behalf of the forest dwellers who live in villages and settlements, and also for the tribal people after consultation with the Minister responsible for regional development. While it is provided that the utilization and control of the communal forest will be further regulated by State Order, currently such a State Order is not enacted.

A multi-stakeholder approach to the classification of the forest is not regulated by law nor are there any specific mechanisms to ensure that both men and women in local communities participate in or take initiatives on the classification of forest, land, and inland water. 

Instead of using the provision of the Planning Act to establish special management areas, the Government decided in 1987 to establish Management Areas by Ministerial Order, commonly known as Multiple Use Management Areas (MUMAs). These Ministerial Orders establishing the MUMAs are the most suitable regulations relevant for setting up sustainable wildlife management areas. The objective of these regulations is to promote the sustainable use of natural resources in demarcated areas. Although it is not explicitly stated that these areas are to be set up in the public interest, based on considerations such as protecting the areas due to rich fish stocks and protecting the bird-rich areas of international significance, the general interest is implicitly recognized. However, these Ministerial Orders are limited to the delineation of areas for sustainable management in general and do not define sustainable management practices. Another limitation of these Ministerial Orders is that they are lower in the legal hierarchy, which can have consequences when in conflict with another law.
With regard to sustainable wildlife management areas to be set up on privately owned land, permission of the private owner is required; the same applies to privately owned land to be used by individuals other than the owner. The Expropriation Act provides for an exhaustive list of events for which expropriation in the public interest is committed; these events are fire, flooding, war or danger of war and riots. Therefore, the creation of areas for the sustainable management of wildlife, whether hunting, fishing and/or ecotourism, does not fall under public interest criteria and thus does not justify expropriation. 

The Environmental Framework Act provides that the activities that may have adverse effects on the environment require an Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA). A list of EIA-required activities should be provided in the EIA Regulations, but they are yet to be enacted. The current EIA Guidelines do not categorize the establishment of sustainable wildlife management areas as an activity subjected to an EIA. 

Intentional violation of one of the statutory regulations under the Environmental Framework Act, or the deliberate non-compliance of the regulations established by the NMA in the interest of the sustainable development of the environment or the regulations regarding environmental hygiene are punishable by a maximum of six years of imprisonment and a fine of the fifth category of Article 40 of the Criminal Code. In addition, with regard to a non-intentional violation of one of the statutory provisions or non-compliance with the regulations established by the NMA, this may result in a fine of the fifth category of Article 40 of the Criminal Code.

The land tenure system in Suriname is based on the domain principle: “All land on which ownership is not proved by others is domain of the State.” There are five types of land tenure titles that used to be issued by the Government on public domain land: allodial ownership, absolute (freehold) ownership, leasehold, land lease and simple rent. However, since 1982, the aforementioned land tenure titles have all expired, and the land lease title (grondhuur) is the only title on public domain land that can be issued. Taking this into account, the land lease title has since been issued for land to be used for habitation, agriculture and animal husbandry, industrial purposes and for special purposes. The nature of the use is specified in the title, and permission must be obtained from the Government to alter the intended use of the land. The law does not specifically provide for land tenure applicable to wildlife management. In addition, under the Forest Management Act, communal forests can be designated for use and management for the benefit of the local communities. However, it does not give them any real right (in rem) and is limited to use and management.

Hunting and fishing activities can be carried out on private, community and state property, with the exception of built-up areas, provided that this is in accordance with the respective wildlife legislation. The Game Act regulates that hunting is permitted on land and waters that are part of the public domain. Hunting on private property is only permitted with written permission from the owner. 

The Fish Stock Protection Act allows to carry out fishing activities in Suriname, which means on private, community and state property. Both hunting and fishing licences are not bound to specific areas. As yet, eco-tourism activities are not regulated, nor does the law provide for the establishment of dedicated eco-tourism areas.

Customary land tenure is found generally in the interior where the Indigenous and Maroon communities are considered to be owners of the land, and their members have rights to use and produce on this land. Recognition of customary tenure regimes is legally addressed in the Forest Management Act. Pursuant to this, the traditional authority may appeal in writing to the President of the Republic of Suriname in the event of a violation of customary rights. Nothing else is regulated with regard to violations of customary rights. Given the nature of this remedy (appeal) and the fact that customary rights should be respected only "as far as possible", this provision has little legal force to the affected Indigenous and Maroon communities. In addition, the Decree on Land Policy Principles (L-1), the Mining Act, the Nature Conservation State Order 1998, and the Nature Conservation State Order 1986 also recognize customary tenure regimes very briefly by referring to “the rights of indigenous and tribal people”. However, these Acts do not contain further provisions or specifications on what these rights specifically are and what the sanctions are when traditional rights are violated. 

Safeguards to avoid infringements with customary land tenure rights are included in the Land Policy, Mining and Forestry legislation, but to a limited extent. The L-1 Principles of Land Policy Act comprises a protection clause for the rights of the indigenous people and the Maroons, by stating that “[u]pon disposing of State land, the rights of tribal Maroons and Amer-Indians to their villages, settlements and agricultural plots are respected, insofar as not contrary to the general interest”. In the Mining Act, it is required that, upon applying for the right to exploration, a list be made of the villages in and in the vicinity of the plot applied for. The Forest Management Act states that “the customary rights of the IPLCs to their villages, settlements and agricultural plots will continue to be respected as much as possible”. The Nature Conservation State Order 1986 states that “when rights that had already been granted at the time of its entry into force establishing the protected area, they shall remain in force, as well as the rights of the villages and settlements of the tribal forest dwellers”. In addition, the Nature Conservation State Order 1998 also states that “the acquired rights will be respected, unless (i) the general interest or the national goal of the established nature reserve is harmed, or (ii) if provided otherwise”.  

Therefore, the customary rights of the IPLCs are not absolute rights and will always be subordinate to the public interest. Hence, the customary rights are respected, provided that they do not interfere with the general interest. Customary rights of indigenous and tribal peoples still remain undefined in national legislation. The national legal framework does not provide any mechanism to incorporate indigenous and Maroon participation in decision-making on resource exploitation and concessions. Yet, with the promulgation of the Environmental Framework Act in 2020, an important legal step has been taken to involve the local communities through the Free, Prior and Informed Consent (FPIC) procedure as part the Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) process. Intentional violation of one of the statutory regulations under the Environmental Framework Act, or the deliberate non-compliance of the regulations established by the National Environmental Authority (NMA) in the interest of the sustainable development of the environment, or of the regulations regarding environmental hygiene is punishable by a maximum of six years of imprisonment and a fine of the fifth category of Article 40 of the Criminal Code. In addition, non-intentional violation of one of the statutory provisions, or non-compliance with the regulations established by the NMA, may result in a fine of the fifth category of Article 40 of the Criminal Code.
 

Suriname has a two-tiered governance system whereby the ministries are responsible for the implementation of administration at the central level, and the District Council is responsible for the implementation at the local level. The District Council consists of a District Commissioner and one designated representative per ministry. The local administration is only involved when it operates within the framework of the law.

Powers and responsibilities of the different ministries are regulated by the State Order -“Task Description of Departments 1991”.In addition, the respective laws on wildlife, land tenure and planning specifically stipulate which ministries are responsible for the implementation and enforcement of these laws. Based on the State Order, the Ministry of Spatial Planning and Environment (ROM) is, among others, responsible for coordinating and monitoring the environmental policy plan, and supervision of the implementation of environmental treaties, as well as ensuring proper spatial planning in consultation with relevant ministries and institutes. Recently, the National Environmental Authority (NMA) was established under the Environmental Framework Act of May 2020, which is under revision in order to redefine the attribution of tasks and responsibilities between NMA and ROM. 

The Ministry of Land Policy and Forest Management is responsible for land issuance, and management of flora and fauna, forests and protected areas. The Suriname Forest Service (SFS) is part of this Ministry, and the Head of the SFS is charged with enforcement of the Game Act 1954, the Nature Conservation Act 1954 and the Forest Management Act. The Nature Conservation Division (NCD) has been authorized by the Head of the SFS with the daily management of the nature reserves. The SFS also mandated its tasks of the Forest Management Act to the Foundation for Forest Management and Control.
The Ministry of Agriculture, Animal Husbandry and Fisheries is responsible for effective management of national fishing resources and the rational exploitation of fish stocks, as well as enforcement of the Fish Stock Protection Act.

The Fisheries Department under the Ministry of Agriculture enforces the Fish Protection Act and the Sea Fisheries Act.

Institutional cooperation and coordination are regulated through the State Order “Task Description Departments 1991” which regulates the tasks and powers of the various ministries. For specific matters, it is expressly stating that there must be cooperation and coordination. This is particularly the case with the Ministry of Spatial Planning and Environment (ROM), which is responsible for coordinating spatial planning with the relevant government institutions. Also, the Ministry is required to monitor the implementation of national environmental policy, in collaboration with relevant ministries and agencies. Although it is one of the responsibilities of the Ministry of ROM to develop and maintain cooperation mechanisms and partnerships in order to meet national and international environmental obligations in an efficient and effective manner, these mechanisms are not yet defined by law. 

The institutional coordinating function of the Ministry of Land Policy and Forest Management is, among others, related to: (i) proper land allocation, in cooperation with relevant ministries, where necessary in an interdepartmental context; (ii) land use where necessary in an interdepartmental context; and (iii) monitoring the lawful and efficient use of issued land where necessary in an interdepartmental context.

The delegation of functions by the ministries or authorities to other actors is not provided for under the current legislative framework. In addition, mechanisms that could provide for possible delegation of powers to non-governmental stakeholders under the public monitoring system are also absent. Further, the law does not create facilitating conditions to enable women, young people or any marginalized/vulnerable groups to assume these functions.