Published On: Fri, Aug 31st, 2018

Press statement Jamaloodin in response to court ruling

Jamaloodin3WILLEMSTAD - Valencia 30 August 2018: Mr George Jamaloodin has noted with disappointment, but also with increasing concern, the court ruling in the lawsuit he has filed against the government.

In that case, Jamaloodin has raised the fact that, although no law in Curaçao permits, he has been detained for more than 18 months by order of Curaçao without a court in Curaçao ever ordering this. However, although the Constitution of Curaçao expressly prescribes that no one may be deprived of his liberty other than in the manner stipulated by law, the court in its judgment has not granted Jamaloodin the protection to which he is entitled. The criminal judge left that question unanswered in two instances and now the civil interlocutory court is doing the same. The denial of justice speaks volumes about the state of respect for Jamaloodin's fundamental rights. Mr. Jamaloodin is getting the runaround while the question remains intact: which law in force in the Netherlands permits someone to be detained for more than 18 months by order of the country without the court of Curaçao having ordered this?

Jamaloodin is now considering his next steps. Apart from going back to the criminal court, setting up a higher appeal, he also has the option to turn to the United Nations Working Group Against Arbitrary Detention, the European Court of Human Rights or the Human Rights Committee of the United Nations.

For the record, it should be emphasized that Mr Jamaloodin has a clean criminal record, both here and elsewhere. He has never been summoned and tried for any offense, let alone condemned for it. Nonetheless, he is treated as a convict on charges of the prosecutor's office when he has never had the guts to take Jamaloodin to court.

Jamaloodin has already informed the Prosecutor on 9 July 2017 that he is relinquishing his right to be present during his possible trial. However, although he paved the way for the public prosecutor to sue him, it has not happened yet.

The public prosecution cannot justify this negligence with the claim that Mr Jamaloodin still has to be heard. Since 2014, the public prosecution has not shown any interest in hearing Mr Jamaloodin. Apart from the fact that Mr Jamaloodin has repeatedly indicated in writing that he is available for interrogation, it is also the question about what such an interview should be conducted. Allegedly Jamaloodin is suspected in three cases. However, when looking at issues in those cases, it is all the more unclear why the Public Prosecution deems it necessary for Jamaloodin to remain in detention:

• The investigation in the Passaat case is already closed, as the examining magistrate has already established. Detention with respect to the investigation can therefore no longer take place;

• In the Maximus case, Jamaloodin was unconditionally released by the examining magistrate. Thus, without an acte contraire from the examining magistrate, Plaintiff cannot be arrested again in the case. There is no such contradictory decision by the examining magistrate;

• In the Germanium case, the case officer informed him in writing that he would not know what to do with him in an interrogation. So even in that case no investigation interest requires the detention of Jamaloodin.

Mr. Jamaloodin makes use of this opportunity to announce that he will prove his innocence in all these cases in due course, exhaustively and in spite of the suspicion of the public prosecutor and the injustice done to him by, among other things, the press release of the Court in the Fonseca case, ultimately the law will prevail, either within the Kingdom or at an international forum.

Valencia, August 30, 2018

Click Tag(s) for Related Articles: