On May 15, 2026, new developments emerged in Suriname’s high-stakes impeachment process against three former senior government officials, after Prosecutor General Garcia Paragsingh formally notified a parliamentary investigative committee that the Public Prosecution Service (OM) has already turned over all required documentation related to the cases.
The proceedings target three ex-cabinet members: Riad Nurmohamed, Bronto Somohardjo and Gillmore Hoefdraad, with the National Assembly required to reach a final ruling on whether to allow criminal prosecution by June 9. Paragsingh’s May 14 correspondence was addressed to committee chair Rabin Parmessar, who had previously extended a written invitation for the prosecutor general to deliver additional in-person testimony to the National Assembly. In her official response, Paragsingh confirmed that the already submitted impeachment motions and accompanying documentation are sufficient to address the committee’s needs. She added that the OM stands ready to provide written responses to any further follow-up questions the committee may put forward within the bounds of national law.
Per Paragsingh’s statement, the three impeachment motions were formally filed with the National Assembly on March 9, 2026, under Article 140 of the Surinamese Constitution and the country’s Law on Impeachment and Prosecution of Political Office Holders. The motions center on alleged criminal offenses the three former ministers are accused of committing during their tenures in public office. Nurmohamed’s case is tied primarily to the controversial Pan American Real Estate project, while proceedings against Somohardjo draw heavily on investigative findings from a CLAD report. Hoefdraad, a former finance minister who is currently a fugitive, faces new impeachment motions linked to the corruption investigation into the Suriname Post Savings Bank (SPSB).
In her letter, Paragsingh emphasized that all filed motions fully comply with the legal requirements laid out in Article 3 of the impeachment law. She confirmed that the submitted documents include detailed factual descriptions of the alleged offenses, alongside clear references to the specific legal provisions that underpin the charges against the three men.
The prosecutor general also clarified the legal scope of the National Assembly’s review role. Under Article 5 of the relevant legislation, parliament is only required to assess whether proceeding with prosecution is justified by the broader public interest from a political and administrative perspective. For this reason, Paragsingh explained, the OM intentionally included supporting background context alongside the formal motions, rather than releasing the full confidential criminal investigation dossier to the public and parliamentary body.
The cross-party investigative committee tasked with reviewing the motions is led by Parmessar, with additional seats held by members from Suriname’s major political parties: Dew Sharman (VHP), Xiabao Zheng (PL), Jennifer Vreedzaam (NDP), Mahinder Jogi (VHP), Ivanildo Plein (NPS) and Ebu Jones (NDP).