Fugitive Guyanese businessman Roger Khan was arrested after two years of surveillance by the Dutch, and with Suriname's rigid court system his trial could last just as long.

Khan was arrested in Paramaribo almost two weeks ago, along with ex-members of the Guyana Police Force Paul Rodrigues, Sean Belfield and Lloyd Roberts following the biggest drug bust in Suriname this year.

Khan has since been charged with possession of arms and ammunition, drug trafficking and being part of a criminal network. The charges are preliminary and likely to be refined upon Khan filing a defence.

According to the Justice Studies Center of the Americas' Report on Judicial Systems in the Americas 2004-2005, in criminal cases in Suriname, a pre-trial investigation process follows a detailed procedure. A suspect is detained for six hours, but might be detained for a maximum of 14 days once the police receive authorisation from the assistant prosecutor (usually a police inspector). In cases involving serious charges and for reasons of security, the judge can add a maximum of 30 days more at the prosecutor's request.

As a result, it could be some time before Khan's associates, Rodrigues, Belfield and Roberts, are charged.

However, a suspect who believes that he or she has been imprisoned illegally has the right to request release before the judge assigned to the case, though this is apparently infrequent, and it is common for suspects to be automatically detained during the prosecution phase, though the legality of this practice is questionable.

Additionally, the law also allows for prosecutors to use their discretion to decide whether or not to present cases before the courts or to suspend a case in progress, depending on its political or criminal importance and the chances for successful prosecution.

The report also says that the Dutch legacy to Suriname includes a legal system based on the tradition of civil or continental European law. According to the Constitu-tion, the judicial branch is responsible for the administration of justice, which includes the Public Pro- secutor's Office.

No trial by jury

Suriname's justice system is based on the Dutch legal system, incorporating aspects of French penal theory. Suriname does not have a jury system or administration of justice by laymen. The Procurator General heads the Public Prosecutor's Office and the Chief Public Prosecutors are in charge of the actual prosecution in the first instance, which the public prosecutors and the deputy public prosecutors may carry out.

The main criminal investigative authorities comprise the court police, prosecuting officers and the examining judge in criminal cases.

It is the prosecuting officer who is primarily responsible for the decision to detain or imprison a suspect. In case of his/her absence this authority is passed on to the deputy public prosecutor. But only the prosecuting officer is authorized to extend the imprisonment of the suspect or to release the suspect or have him released.

Now, if the prosecuting officer considers a preliminary inquiry by the examining judge necessary, he will make a request. The examining judge may then, in anticipation of the summons for the court trial of the criminal case by prosecuting officer, at the request of the prosecuting officer, order or refuse custody of the suspect.

If the prosecuting officer deems it expedient to prosecute on the basis of the results of the preliminary inquiry, then he brings the criminal case before the court by means of a summons. The writ of summons consists amongst other things of the charge. The charge contains a factual description of the punishable act(s) of which the suspect is accused. The charge has a tyrannical or limitative force: the judge, in the assessment of the question, which acts were perpetrated by the suspect has to limit himself to the acts with which the suspect is charged.

The examination by the judge at the trial is done on the basis of the charge and as a result of the examination in his court.

Once the criminal case has been brought before the court, then only the judge decides on the further detention or discharge of the suspect. On the basis of the results of the preliminary inquiry and the examination at the trial the prosecuting officer concludes on the basis of the legal evidence submitted by him and/or which acts charged have been proven. And if he deems the perpetrator liable to punishment, in accordance with the seriousness of the acts proven, he may make a proposal for punishment to the judge. It is also the task of the prosecuting officer, and not just of the attorney of the suspect, to express himself on circumstances for preclusion of criminal sanctions or reduction of sentence and the consequences thereof for the judgement of the court.

Extradition

So far, Suriname has signalled its intent to proceed with the prosecution of Khan, although there has been a formal extradition request by the US government. Although local authorities had been interested in questioning Khan and the others, the government has not made any attempt to extradite him, saying that there is no strong case against him here.

However, Suriname's Justice Minister Chandri-kapersad Santokhi has underscored the country's case against Khan, describing alleged links with a vast criminal organisation while also accusing him of planning the assassination of key government and judicial officers, including ministers.

In April, a New York district court indicted Khan for conspiring to import cocaine into the US. A month before the US had identified Khan as a "known drug trafficker" in its International Narcotics Control report and Washing-ton has indicated that it would be keen on prosecuting him. Additionally, Khan is also wanted in Vermont in the US for 13-year-old federal charges on drugs and arms possession.

Under mutual assistance instruments, Suriname may extradite upon request, though discretion is entirely within the power of the Minister of Justice. Unless the Minister of Justice is immediately of the opinion that the request for extradition has to be rejected, he passes on the request for extradition with the accompanying documents to the Procurator General.

There are also defined grounds for refusal of an extradition request. These include if, according to the laws of the requesting state, the death penalty is set for the fact for which extradition is requested; if the person sought has been prosecuted in Suriname and the criminal case was dismissed by the prosecution and according to Surinamese law the reinstatement of prosecution is excluded; if the person sought was sentenced in Suriname and the judgement of the Surinamese Court is not open to challenge and on the basis of the Ne Bis In Idem principle he cannot be prosecuted and sentenced again; if the fact of the punishment imposed for which the extradition is requested is precluded by the lapse of time; if there is a suspicion that in case of granting of the request the person sought would be prosecuted, punished or in any other way affected as a result of his religious or political conviction, his nationality, his race or the group of the population to which he belongs; if the consequences of the extradition of the person sought will be of extreme duress in relation to his youthful age, old age or bad health; and if the extradition concerns punishable acts of a political nature.