THE INSTALLATION OF two national commissions – one for civil aviation facilitation and one for civil aviation security – fits within the international obligations that Suriname has entered into as a member of the International Civil Aviation Organization. The fact that the government is taking this step is therefore to be welcomed. Safe and efficient aviation is not a luxury, but a basic requirement for economic development, tourism and international connectivity.
Yet a question arises that should be asked of almost every new committee in Suriname: what makes these committees make a difference? History does not make us optimistic. Successive governments have established a long series of committees, working groups, task forces and advisory bodies over the past decades. This often happened with ambitious goals and a lot of public attention. But society was rarely informed about the results. Have the set goals been achieved? Which recommendations have been implemented? Which bottlenecks have been resolved? There is usually no answer to those questions.
The value of these committees is not determined by the names of the members or the number of meetings, but by demonstrable improvements at Surinamese airports
There is a risk that the two recently established committees will also degenerate into consultation platforms that meet periodically, without the traveler at the airport ultimately noticing anything. Because waiting times do not become shorter because there are more meetings. Security does not become stronger through new consultation structures alone. The actual improvement must take place on the work floor: with the airport operator, the security services, immigration, customs, airlines and all other authorities involved.
That is precisely why the government should formulate clear and measurable objectives from the start. How much should the average waiting time for passengers decrease? Which security measures must be introduced within what period? Which recommendations from international audits are given priority?
And just as important: report publicly on this annually. Transparency creates trust, but also responsibility. When citizens, the aviation sector and the National Assembly can monitor the results being achieved, there is also pressure to actually comply with agreements.
These committees should not become an end in themselves. Their value is not determined by the names of the members or the number of meetings, but by demonstrable improvements at Surinamese airports. Only when passengers are helped more quickly, procedures are better coordinated and international safety standards are visibly strengthened, can we speak of a successful initiative.
Suriname has no shortage of committees. What the country needs are committees that deliver results and are publicly accountable for them.
