Eighteenth-century colonial Suriname has been a plural society, divided by people’s race, status, religion and socioeconomic class. Similar to almost every other early modern state, Suriname did...Show moreEighteenth-century colonial Suriname has been a plural society, divided by people’s race, status, religion and socioeconomic class. Similar to almost every other early modern state, Suriname did not know any uniformly codified legal systems nor a constitution that enshrined the rights of its inhabitants. To the contrary, legislation was fragmented, hybrid and often arose impromptu. In addition, Suriname did not know any comprehensive criminal laws or procedure either. This thesis argues that, largely due to these legal lacunae, the colonial authorities could unabashedly treat different population groups on unequal legal and judicial footing. However, this thesis also stresses that several previously accepted assumptions with regard to colonial justice must be nuanced. It concludes that, despite the disparate and biased forms of treatment, colonial justice has been considerably more thorough than deemed before, even with regard to minority groups such as the enslaved and manumitted. There have been no signs that the Surinamese courts functioned as kangaroo courts; all suspects were offered a trial. In addition, verdicts of convicts did not come about arbitrarily but were rather based on jurisprudence. The authorities took into consideration the conclusiveness of the evidence and any aggravating or mitigating circumstances as well. As a result, punishments were much more varied than the merely horrendous corporal and capital punishments that have dominated historiography hitherto. Moreover, from the second half of the eighteenth century, several minority litigants started to search for justice on their own behalf. In the end, the colonial authorities did certainly not always adopt a one-dimensional stance in favour of white colonists at the expense of other population groups.Show less
