In a significant judicial ruling, Suriname’s Court of Justice has rendered its verdict in the case involving former Vice President Ashwin Adhin, who currently serves as Parliamentary Assembly Chairman. The court granted substantial compensation for Adhin’s wrongful detention period while referring claims for immaterial damages to civil court proceedings.
Legal representative Irvin Kanhai, who jointly defended Adhin alongside colleague Chandra Algoe, revealed to Starnieuws that the court awarded approximately SRD 400,000 (Surinamese dollars). This compensation package comprises three distinct components: reimbursement for the nine days of unlawful custody, coverage of legal expenses, and compensation for material damages incurred during the proceedings.
According to Kanhai’s breakdown, roughly SRD 100,000 was allocated specifically for the unjust detention period, while the remaining SRD 300,000 covers legal assistance provided by both attorneys. The defense had additionally sought substantial compensation for immaterial damages, including reputational harm and psychological distress resulting from the detention.
The court did not dismiss these immaterial damage claims but determined that Article 77 of the Criminal Code provides no legal basis for such awards within criminal proceedings. Instead, the judiciary clarified that pursuing compensation for non-material injuries requires initiating separate civil litigation.
“The court isn’t denying his entitlement to such compensation,” Kanhai emphasized. “However, within the criminal law framework, the court cannot substantively rule on these matters.” The attorney noted this represents one of the highest compensation amounts ever awarded under Article 77 for wrongful detention cases, potentially setting a precedent for future acquittals or dismissed prosecutions.
Kanhai further clarified that the court’s decision doesn’t guarantee immediate payment, despite creating an enforceable title. Actual fund recovery might necessitate additional legal procedures, potentially involving asset seizure—a process the attorney described as potentially protracted.
Whether Adhin will pursue civil proceedings for immaterial damages remains unconfirmed, though Kanhai indicated he would recommend such action to comprehensively address all damages suffered.