The Caribbean Court of Justice (CCJ) has ordered Suriname to compensate Derek Ramsamooj with $30,000 for damages suffered during his detention. The ex-political advisor’s health deteriorated significantly while in custody, raising serious concerns about his treatment.
Background of the Ramsamooj Case
The case began following Ramsamooj’s arrest shortly after the formation of the Santokhi cabinet. His detention was linked to an investigation into alleged corruption at the Surinamese Postal Savings Bank (SPSB). Initially intended as a financial inquiry, it quickly transformed into extended restrictions on his freedom, severely impacting his health.
Highlights from the Court’s Decision
- The CCJ found that Ramsamooj’s right to free movement under the Revised Treaty of Chaguaramas was violated.
- Detention conditions contributed to his health decline, leading to significant physical and psychological harm.
- The use of statements obtained during the unlawful detention was prohibited in future criminal proceedings against him.
- The court stated that Suriname could still prosecute Ramsamooj based on legally obtained evidence.
Health Impacts of Detention
Medical experts, including a cardiologist, reported that Ramsamooj suffered a heart attack and stroke while in custody. These incidents, alongside a worsening of pre-existing cardiovascular issues, highlighted the severe consequences of his detention.
Legal Findings and Compensation Ruling
Despite the ruling’s conclusions, not all legal claims were validated. The court noted insufficient evidence regarding Ramsamooj’s active service at the time of the alleged violations. The connection between specific medical expenses and the lack of legal assistance was also deemed unproven.
Nonetheless, the CCJ considered the adverse effects of Ramsamooj’s detention significant enough to warrant damages. Citing violations of fundamental rights within the CARICOM legal framework, the court’s ruling justified financial compensation. CCJ President Winston Anderson affirmed this conclusion, underscoring the court’s commitment to upholding justice.
