A/HRC/33/4 175a), defamation by publication (article 176) and support for discriminatory actions were criminalized. 35. Article 500a of the Penal Code criminalized occupational discrimination, including discrimination based on sexual orientation. 36. There were no differences in regulations and legislation regarding opportunities to carry out activities in Suriname by different organizations. 37. Lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender persons could submit requests for permission to carry out activities under the same legal conditions as all other organizations and legal entities in Suriname. The principle of equality remained applicable when it came to fundamental rights, such as the right to freedom of thought and expression and the right to freedom of association and peaceful assembly. It had been a regular occurrence that police protection and surveillance had been provided to organizations of lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender and intersex persons when they carried out public activities. 38. Suriname fully subscribed to the principles of democracy and respect for the rule of law. Taking into account the separation of power, the Government was convinced that the judiciary was capable of holding those who had committed crimes accountable. 39. The amendment of the Amnesty Act of 19 August 1992 was done on the initiative of a number of legislators, in accordance with the principle of equality enshrined in article 8 of the Constitution. 40. Discussions had been held in parliament on their initiative when that draft piece of legislation had been introduced, and parliament had adopted the amendment according to its rules of procedures. Because of the separation of powers, the Government (the executive) could not dictate to parliament (the legislature). 41. Prior to the Amnesty Act of 5 April 2012, two similar laws were passed by the legislator. The adoption of the 2012 Amnesty Act was taken in order to remove the discriminatory aspects of the 1992 Amnesty Act. The 1992 Amnesty Act solely and explicitly covered all criminal offences committed in the period from 1 January 1985 to 19 August 1992. 42. It should also be pointed out that the amendment was simply a qualitative expansion of the previous Amnesty Act of 19 August 1992. 43. The introduction of the explicit call for the establishment of a truth and reconciliation commission implied a qualitative improvement of the 1992 Act, since its precursor had not called for the creation of a procedure to seek truth and reconciliation regarding the violations and crimes it covered. 44. Concerning ratification of the Amendments to the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court on the crime of aggression (the Kampala Amendments), draft legislation related to the Kampala Amendments had already been approved by the Council of Ministers and submitted to the State Council. After approval by the State Council, the draft laws would be submitted to the National Assembly. 45. Suriname had taken many steps with regard to the problem of mercury contamination within the country. The most recent of those steps had been the establishment of the Gold Sector Planning Programme within the Ministry of Natural Resources. The National Institute for Environment and Development in Suriname, as the technical institute within the Ministry of Home Affairs, had taken the initiative in 2013 to conduct a legal and institutional assessment of the Minamata Convention on Mercury. That assessment had led to the formulation of a national action plan for the implementation of the Convention and the Government was working on its ratification. 6 GE.16-11346