Kanhai surprised by OM’s decision to lodge an appeal

Irvin Kanhai, the defense attorney of Desi Bouterse, told Times of Suriname that he was surprised by the Public Prosecutor’s (OM) decision to lodge an appeal against the Military Court’s January 30 decision. The prosecution has lodged an appeal against the Military Court’s decision to reject the request to stop all further prosecution of the suspects in the December 8 trial because of Article 148 of the Constitution. Kanhai pointed out that the Public Prosecutor’s Office is using a legal tool which is anchored in the law. He pointed out that some people such as the relatives assume that the constitutional state is at risk when things do not go how they want them to go and that they claim that there is a police state. He made it clear that “the defense of Bouterse has nothing to do with the appeal that has been lodged.” “Those who know the penal code by heart, know that the Public Prosecutor’s Office has the right to lodge an appeal. When the request was made a week ago, some claimed that the constitutional state had prevailed,” said Kanhai who added that he expects the trial where the closing speech was supposed to be held in the military room and which is scheduled for February 17 will also be postponed because the Public Prosecutor’s Office has also lodged an appeal in those cases. “Article 148 of the Constitution gives the executive branch authorization and that it is not regarded as interference in a trial. Kanhai’s colleague Irene Lalji pointed out that there was a lot of speculation about what was going to happen in the Military Court on February 9 and if the Judge advocate was going to hold his closing speech. She explained that everybody had forgotten about the options of the Public Prosecutor’s Office. She pointed out that it is democratic to utilize a legal tool.

Lalji and Kanhai explained that if the Court of Justice rejects the request of the Public Prosecutor’s Office, the case will resume from the point where it was at the Military Court which means that the closing speech will be held. Lalji explained that the judge advocate in his closing speech could ask for the Public Prosecutor to opt for inadmissibility on the grounds of the fact that the government has given instructions to halt the legal proceedings. It is however up to the judges to reach a decision.