In a striking admission of institutional failure, BEP parliamentary leader Ronny Asabina has publicly acknowledged that Suriname’s National Assembly severely mishandled controversial legislation governing financial provisions for the three branches of government. The assemblyman described the situation as “a blow to public trust” and called for immediate consultations to rectify the widely criticized arrangements.
Asabina conceded that parliament has become the target of intense societal criticism and distrust, noting that the experience feels “sometimes hurtful and intimidating” for elected representatives. The laws originally intended to harmonize financial provisions across the legislative, executive, and judicial branches have instead created a public perception of self-enrichment and excessive benefits rather than achieving synchronization and balance.
While rejecting suggestions of bad faith, Asabina stated unequivocally: “We have failed miserably. No branch excluded. Society rightly feels misled.” He expressed particular regret about the compensation structure for the judiciary, which has provoked widespread public outrage. The politician acknowledged that his own BEP faction couldn’t have anticipated how disproportionately and inappropriately the decisions would unfold.
Asabina revealed critical flaws in the legislative process, noting that parliament didn’t serve as the first stop in the lawmaking process and that certain elements escaped notice during legal translation and formulation of articles. He questioned whether designers and direct stakeholders fully comprehended the scope of the controversial provisions.
The assemblyman highlighted unmet promises regarding financial transparency, revealing that commitments to share the financial consequences with parliament remain unfulfilled. He also criticized the lack of substantive depth during parliamentary deliberations, which were often overshadowed by mutual accusations and populist rhetoric.
Asabina called for emergency consultations among the three branches of government, followed by thorough review and repair of financial provisions, including budgeting for the financial implications. He emphasized this isn’t pressure tactics but a call for shared responsibility within the separation of powers framework.
Additionally, he proposed broader reforms including establishing an independent Integrity Chamber to promote governance integrity and considering international examples that implement maximum income limits for top officials to reduce legal inequality. Asabina stressed that transparency, accountability, and restored trust must form the foundation of the recovery process.