Drug and firearms law in Suriname: statutes on record and in force

International framework

Suriname is bound by 3 of the four instruments this dataset tracks, the earliest from 1992 and the most recent from 2021. The exception is the Firearms Protocol, and that exception has consequences: there is no treaty obligation to mark or trace weapons, so a firearm recovered at a crime scene may have no route back to its point of diversion — the single most common reason a trafficking chain cannot be reconstructed.

What each instrument obliges a party to do is set out once, per instrument, in the conventions reference. The dates above are what is specific to Suriname: they are the points from which each obligation began to bind, taken from the depositary's own status tables.

National legislation

Suriname's national implementing legislation is not yet confirmed against a citable national register. The convention and monitoring records above carry named sources and check dates; this field does not, so it states nothing rather than something unsourced.

Enforcement authorities

One body is named in the record for Suriname, each confirmed on an official host tied to the jurisdiction. The division of mandate is what decides where a case can actually be taken: interception, investigation and prosecution are three different powers, rarely held by one body.

Ratification sequence

Which instrument came first says something the total does not. Suriname came to these instruments over 29 years, beginning with the 1988 Convention in 1992 and ending with the UNCAC in 2021. Measured against each instrument's own adoption, the shortest gap was the 1988 Convention at 4 years, the longest the UNCAC at 18.

Suriname became a party to the 1988 Convention in 1992, 4 years after it was adopted — faster than the median lag of 5 years across this dataset.

A complete treaty position assembled over decades is not the same as one assembled at once. For the 15 years between 1992 and 2007, Suriname was bound by the 1988 Convention but not yet by the UNTOC or the UNCAC. For the 14 years between 2007 and 2021, Suriname was bound by the 1988 Convention and the UNTOC but not yet by the UNCAC. The practical effect is on what could be charged, and on what could be confiscated, in the years before the later instruments arrived.

On coverage, Suriname is one of 22 jurisdiction s here party to 3 of the four, against 81 party to all four. The Latin America and the Caribbean cohort runs to 33 records, 3 of them currently listed for increased monitoring.

What is not in force

One of the four instruments does not bind Suriname, and the gap has specific consequences rather than symbolic ones.

Firearms Protocol — adopted 2001, and Suriname is not a party. In practice, there is no treaty obligation to mark or trace weapons, so a firearm recovered at a crime scene may have no route back to its point of diversion — the single most common reason a trafficking chain cannot be reconstructed.

Financial-crime monitoring

As of the FATF plenary statements of 2026-06-19, Suriname is recorded as Not listed . The lists are revised three times a year, so this record moves on that cadence rather than continuously. What each status entails is set out on the FATF grey list tracker.

Questions about drug and firearms law in Suriname

Sources

• Ratification dates: United Nations Treaty Collection, depositary status tables (chapters VI-19, XVIII-12, XVIII-14, XVIII-12-c). Checked 2026-07-29.
• Listing status: FATF, Jurisdictions under Increased Monitoring and High-Risk Jurisdictions subject to a Call for Action, 2026-06-19.