The Court-Martial will rule on Desi Bouterse’s resistance case on March 31. The session has been adjourned to March 31. The Court-Martial will now consider the defenses put forward by the defense of Bouterse and the military officer.
Bouterse’s lawyer, Irvin Kanhai, has questioned the validity of the summons. Counsel is of the opinion that the summons should be declared null and void. According to him, the summons does not comply with article 242 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. He also cited the Amnesty Act of 2012. Kanhai believes that the Court Martial cannot ignore this law.
Auditor-military Manro Danning argued that the summons is valid. He asked the Court Martial to reject Kanhai’s exceptions. The competition prosecutor also said that the Amnesty Act cannot apply to this case. He substantiated this by stating that interference in cases that are already in court is not allowed. He referred to Article 131 of the Constitution.
In response to questions from the judge, Bouterse no longer knew what his home address is. The judge asked him whether he wanted to respond to what had been brought forward. Bouterse said he didn’t want that.