Instinctive feelings often stem from dissatisfaction, fear, intuition, anger, or distrust. These sentiments provoke collective calls for the screening of candidates for public office. 

Recently, an article titled "The Draft Integrity Act for Public Officials in Suriname Examined" by Mirto Murray appeared in the Surinamese Law Journal, Issue 3, 2024. I read the article with great interest. In addition to the precision with which he analyzes the proposed law, he inadvertently prompted me to reflect on similar trust issues concerning public officials in Curaçao, a former partner of Suriname within a shared kingdom. 

A somewhat comparable attempt to screen parliamentary candidates in Curaçao failed prematurely in parliament earlier this year. The proposal did not gain sufficient support from sitting members of parliament. 

Murray is a legal expert, while I am a citizen with some affinity for public administration. I choose to approach the trust issue starting with the objectives outlined in the draft legislation. 

Explanation 

The explanatory notes of the draft legislation state that in Suriname, "at the national level, political officials at all levels are often associated with criminal offenders." The proposal aims to promote and protect democracy. The screening would be mandatory for officials ranging from elected members of parliament, members of the Council of State, the President, members of the Council of Ministers, Ministers, and Deputy Ministers, to directors and deputy directors of departments. The expectation is that public officials will carry out their duties in an honest and transparent manner, according to the notes. 

However, one might question whether screening will indeed achieve the desired results. Screening is merely a snapshot in time. Establishing screening requirements is a good starting point, but additional measures will be needed to help appointed officials remain on the right path. The statement in the explanatory notes that "public officials are expected to carry out their duties in an honest and transparent manner" is based on an assumption. 

Instinctive Feelings 

Many suggest that instinctive feelings should not be dismissed as mere emotions but should instead prompt conscious and rational reflection on their origins. 

Further research into the possible causes of distrust in public officials could provide more clarity and lead to more targeted solutions. The discussion itself can be enlightening and reveal additional paths to resolution. 

The Role of Screening and Institutional Oversight in Building Trust 

The extent to which screening contributes to trust becomes clearer when existing checks and balances are evaluated for their practical effectiveness, as intended by the constitution. Addressing distrust could be further supported by enhancing the effectiveness of these checks and balances. 

Key Factors 

Unlike Curaçao, Suriname has not conducted a National Integrity System (NIS) analysis. This system provides insight into how corruption undermines checks and balances within a society. Corruption disrupts social order, leads to the unfair distribution of resources, renders government policies ineffective, increases poverty, stifles collective and individual development opportunities, jeopardizes livelihoods, and creates victims. 

Transparency International noted in 2023: 
"There is a general lack of trust in Curaçao’s key institutions. This is a major obstacle for strengthening the foundations of this new country and will limit the success of any programme addressing corruption and promoting good governance." 

According to Transparency International, Suriname's Corruption Perception Index in 2023 was 40, below the global average of 43. Over two-thirds of countries score below 50, indicating serious corruption problems. The global average has stagnated at 43, with most countries showing no progress or regressing over the last decade. 

In comparison, the Netherlands scored 79 in 2023. However, Denmark, Finland, New Zealand, Norway, Singapore, and Sweden are among the nations with the best scores globally. 

The Role of Supreme Audit Institutions 

A Supreme Audit Institution (SAI) is tasked with independently auditing government revenues and expenditures to serve society. Based on its findings, the SAI evaluates the efficiency and legality of public spending. 

This evaluation involves scrutinizing the actions of public officials within the framework of national laws, such as a Budgetary Law. Inefficiencies, legal violations, or wasteful spending are openly addressed, paving the way for corrective measures. Society, with or without the support of parliament, can then push for these corrections, fostering greater trust. SAIs promote transparency, accountability, and civic responsibility. 

Suriname’s Supreme Audit Institution was relatively recently granted independence and has yet to fully realize its societal effectiveness. As of the most recent available financial report from 2021, the country’s annual accounts are not yet prepared in a timely and accurate manner according to international standards. 

This is one reason why the Kingdom of the Netherlands recently extended its financial oversight of Curaçao. It also serves as an indicator of the societal effectiveness of Curaçao's Supreme Audit Institution. 

Ombudsman: A Pillar of Trust in Governance 

In many countries, the Ombudsman plays a crucial role in fostering public trust in government and public officials. The Ombudsman is an independent and impartial institution that handles citizen complaints about government services. 

While the Surinamese Constitution mentions citizens’ rights, it does not explicitly establish the Ombudsman function. However, press reports indicate that Suriname is working toward creating a strong, independent body to advocate for citizens' rights and interests while also improving government services to the public. 

Effectiveness of the Ombudsman in Curaçao 

In 2019, the effectiveness of Curaçao’s Ombudsman was addressed by the institution itself. The Ombudsman questioned why government agencies had a low response rate to its inquiries about citizen complaints. 

Five years later, Curaçao could now evaluate whether the Ombudsman’s recommendations have led to improved effectiveness and tangible benefits for the community. The report from that evaluation is available on the Ombudsman’s website for public consultation. 

Constitutional Role 

The potential of institutions like the Ombudsman and the Supreme Audit Institution (SAI) is enshrined in the constitution. However, the reality suggests that public unease demands more tangible safeguards. 

While many factors contribute to societal stability, the foundational role of these high state institutions cannot be overlooked. The rule of law serves as a critical framework for identifying and examining other contributing institutions and factors. 

Societal Effectiveness 

Like Curaçao, Suriname appears to need multiple parallel efforts alongside establishing screening requirements for public officials. Citizens of both nations would benefit from deliberate and focused efforts to enhance the societal effectiveness of their high state institutions, such as the Ombudsman and the Supreme Audit Institution. Strengthening these institutions deserves at least the same level of commitment as efforts to implement official screening processes. 

A Balanced Approach 

The recommendation is clear: pursue the screening of public officials, but also harness public sentiment in a constructive way to drive efforts on multiple fronts simultaneously. Both Curaçao and Suriname seem to recognize this. Otherwise, as the saying goes, it would be like “mopping the floor with the tap still running.” 

Stanley Bodok is a Curaçaoan citizen and a graduate of the British College of Journalism, working as a freelance writer and journalist with a focus on governance and healthcare. 

With academic qualifications in business administration, public administration, and healthcare management, Bodok has over 30 years of experience working in Curaçao's government and healthcare sectors. Following his retirement, he has volunteered with various Curaçaoan civic organizations. 

In 2012, Bodok briefly served as Minister of Health and Social Affairs in the interim cabinet of Stanley Betrian.