At the opening of a key parliamentary committee session on May 22, Ashwin Adhin, president of Suriname’s National Assembly (DNA), laid out clear foundational principles for parliamentary proceedings, emphasizing the non-negotiable importance of public access, transparency, and institutional integrity across all legislative work.
Adhin’s opening address systematically clarified the legal and procedural frameworks that govern the nature of the ongoing committee hearings, which are scheduled to question several former ministers facing investigations. The first closed-door committee session is set to hear testimony from ex-minister Riad Nurmohamed, while a third session has been scheduled to question fugitive former minister Gillmore Hoefdraad. A second hearing, scheduled for 11 a.m. the same day, will be open to the public at the request of former minister Bronto Somohardjo, who is set to testify at that session. Somohardjo has stated that the public has a right to full transparency in his case, and that he has no information to hide from Suriname’s society.
Adhin explained that Article 82 of Suriname’s Constitution establishes the default rule that all National Assembly meetings must be open to the public, and closed-door sessions can only be held if the Assembly explicitly votes to hold proceedings behind closed doors. This structure means that confidentiality is not a default policy choice, but rather a strictly limited exception that requires formal official approval to go into effect.
He further detailed how the National Assembly’s Rules of Order (RvO) regulate committee operations, specifically pointing to Chapter III, which states that preliminary investigations conducted by parliamentary committees are in principle open to the public, unless confidentiality is formally mandated by the full Assembly or the national cabinet. Adhin also stressed that the confidentiality rules that apply to plenary Assembly sessions do not automatically extend to committee proceedings.
The Assembly president also addressed the special procedural framework that applies to current and former public officials facing criminal allegations, as laid out in Article 140 of the Constitution and the country’s Act on the Status of Impeachment and Prosecution of Political Officeholders (WIPA). Under this framework, a special investigative committee carries out the inquiry process, sets its own working procedures, and may close specific segments of its work to the public when deemed necessary.
Adhin also clarified rules on committee leadership: while most standing and ad hoc committees elect their own independent chairs, the president of the National Assembly automatically serves as chair for four specific committees, including the investigative committee formed under Article 8 of the WIPA.
Adhin confirmed that the committee had formally approved the day’s hearing schedule: the first and third testimony sessions will be held behind closed doors, while the second session will proceed as an open hearing, following a formal request from the witness and a vote among committee members approving the public session.
Through his opening address, Adhin set a clear tone for the entire inquiry process, stressing that the country’s highest legislative body must lead by example in upholding integrity, transparency, and orderly democratic debate. Following the opening remarks, the session continued under the leadership of committee chair Rabin Parmessar.