Lawyer: Suriname breached Trini political analyst's human rights

The Caribbean Court of Justice (CCJ) has reserved its ruling in the case brought by Trinidadian political analyst Derek Ramsamooj, who is challenging his nearly two-year detention in Suriname as part of a corruption probe.

The hearing began on November 6 at the CCJ’s Port of Spain headquarters, with Ramsamooj, 62, testifying before CCJ president Justice Winston Anderson and Justices Maureen Rajnauth-Lee, Denys Barrow, Peter Jamadar and Chantal Ononaiwu.

It concluded on November 7.

Ramsamooj was detained in Paramaribo in October 2020 while preparing to return to TT. He was held under a “beperking order,” which restricted his communication and denied him access to legal counsel while authorities investigated alleged payments from the Surinamese Post Savings Bank. Although the restriction was later lifted, he remained barred from leaving the country and was eventually charged. A judge allowed him to return home in September 2022 due to serious medical conditions, including a stroke, diabetes and coronary artery disease.

His legal team argues that the restriction order was unlawful, violated Caricom treaty rights, and amounted to discrimination based on nationality. They further allege he was subjected to arbitrary detention, inhumane conditions and a politically-motivated prosecution.

Ramsamooj’s lead attorney, Justin Phelps, SC, in his submissions, argued that the right to freedom of movement under the Revised Treaty of Chaguaramas could not be meaningful if it was not supported by basic human rights protections, including access to legal representation and safeguards against arbitrary detention.

He said Ramsamooj’s treatment effectively rendered that right “ineffective,” as the beperking order had prevented him from consulting a lawyer when he most needed to do so. He further submitted that while the order may exist in Surinamese law, it should not be applied in a way that undermines the treatment owed to Caricom nationals, and that the court should find that Suriname’s actions fell below regional standards.

Phelps urged the court to consider the Charter of Civil Society as reflecting minimum protections expected within the Caribbean community.

In response, Suriname’s attorney, Hans Lim A Po, argued that the beperking order could be challenged through domestic legal procedures and was not discriminatory, noting that prison conditions in Suriname were the same for locals and foreigners alike. He said Ramsamooj’s application did not raise discrimination as its basis and warned that recognising unwritten “common fundamental values” alongside the Treaty could be legally risky, especially since Caricom does not have its own legislative machinery.

Lim A Po maintained that the Charter of Civil Society was not legally binding and was not intended to serve as an enforceable rights standard. However, he acknowledged that Suriname would be required to amend its laws if the CCJ ultimately rules that the beperking order or its application was incompatible with treaty obligations.

In its defence, Suriname has relied on Article 226 of the treaty, which allows member states to take measures necessary to protect public order and safety. Lim A Po argued that lifting restrictions during the investigation could have jeopardised the wider corruption investigation. Phelps countered that there was no evidence that the detention was necessary for public order, while Lim A Po insisted the measures were applied to suspects regardless of nationality.

In earlier submissions, in response to questions from the judges, both attorneys agreed that if a beperking order was declared unlawful, nothing prevented the authorities from using evidence obtained during interrogation, including a confession, in underlying criminal proceedings. However, it would be for a court to set it aside on an application.

During cross-examination on Thursday, Surinamese public prosecutor Romeo Rampersad admitted the investigation into Ramsamooj stemmed from a separate fraud probe involving the bank’s former chief executive. Rampersad claimed Ramsamooj signed documents acknowledging the detention order and his right to challenge it, but he could not produce the document, saying it was only provided to Suriname’s legal team.

Rampersad also confirmed that a translator present during an interrogation in which Ramsamooj allegedly confessed was later removed from the case after complaints of bias.

Suriname’s Chief Public Prosecutor, Claudia Brigitte Bruining, testified that while the “beperking order” is based on Dutch law, Suriname has not yet adopted the Dutch requirement for immediate access to legal representation. She maintained that the denial of an attorney was lawful at the time.

British cardiologist Dr Jonathan Clague also gave unchallenged evidence that the conditions of detention had adverse effects on Ramsamooj’s health.

Ramsamooj is seeking declarations that Suriname breached Caricom treaty obligations, violated his freedom of movement, and subjected him to unlawful and discriminatory detention.

Also making submissions were attorneys for Caricom, Lisa Shoman, SC, and Radha Permanand.

Shoman noted that there were no unfettered discretions. “All rights have limits.” She also submitted that while member states could invoke the exception right, there was no right to deny someone their right to due process where it is arbitrary or unjustifiable.

“You must show why it (a restriction of right) was required in the member state.”

She said Suriname would have to demonstrate why the procedures used under its laws were necessary. Questioned on the binding nature of the charter, Shoman admitted that there was nothing to show that it was. But, she submitted that the preamble of the RTC reaffirmed the human rights of Caricom nationals.

Shoman also said that while national law enforcement authorities can exercise criminal law in their jurisdictions, their actions were “open to scrutiny where they offend human rights,” unless they can show why the actions are reasonably justifiable in a free and democratic society.

In response, Lim A Po said that while Suriname signed the charter, it was not binding, “but there was a commitment.”

Phelps said placing the charter in the preamble of the RTC made it legally binding on member states.

At the end of a full day of submissions on Friday, Justice Anderson reserved the court’s ruling.

“We are reserving our opinion, and we will let you know as soon as we have reached our decision.”

The TT government held a watching brief at the hearing.