ORDER OF THE
INTER-AMERICAN COURT OF HUMAN RIGHTS*
MARCH 9, 2020
CASE OF LIAKAT ALI ALIBUX V. SURINAME
MONITORING COMPLIANCE WITH JUDGMENT

HAVING SEEN:
1.
The Judgment on preliminary objections, merits, reparations and costs
(hereinafter “the Judgment”) delivered by the Inter-American Court of Human Rights
(hereinafter “the Inter-American Court” or “the Court”) on January 30, 2014,1 in which
the Court declared the international responsibility of the Republic of Suriname
(hereinafter “the State” or “Suriname”) for the violation of the rights to appeal a
judgment to a higher court and the freedom of movement and residence due to the
prevention from leaving the country without complying with the principle of legality, to
the detriment of Liakat Ali Alibux, former Minister of Natural Resources and Minister of
Finance of Suriname between September 1996 and August 2000. These violations
were declared in relation to the criminal proceedings initiated in January 2002 and the
subsequent conviction of Mr. Alibux in November 2003 for the crime of forgery for
events that took place in 2000 when he occupied the aforementioned office of Minister
of Finance. Mr. Alibux was tried and convicted by the High Court of Justice in
accordance with the procedure set forth in the Indictment of Political Office Holders
Act. Given that there was no review proceeding before the High Court of Justice, the
Court verified that Mr. Alibux did not count on the possibility of appealing his
conviction, regardless of the rank or position held and regardless of the jurisdiction
established as competent for his trial. Moreover, the Court established that, while the
criminal proceedings against Mr. Alibux were underway, the State prevented him from
leaving the country, without demonstrating that there was a clear and specific
regulation establishing the legality of the restriction on the freedom of movement in
this case. The Court determined that said Judgment constitutes by itself a form of
reparation and, additionally, ordered the State certain reparation measures (infra
considerandum 1).
2.

The report submitted by the State on May 12, 2015.

3.
The observations presented by the Inter-American Commission on Human
Rights on July 30, 2015.
4.
The notes sent by the Court’s Secretariat (hereinafter “the Secretariat”)
between July 2015 and August 2017,2 on the instructions of the Presidency of the
Court, reminding the victim’s representative3 that the term to submit his observations

*
Judge Eduardo Vio Grossi and Judge Humberto Antonio Sierra Porto did not participate in the
deliberation and signing of this Resolution for reasons of force majeure.
1

Cf. Case of Liakat Ali Alibux v. Suriname. Preliminary objections, merits, reparations and costs.
Judgment of January 30, 2014. Series C No. 276. The complete text is available at:
http://www.corteidh.or.cr/docs/casos/articulos/seriec_276_eng.pdf. The Judgment was notified on March 21,
2014.
2

Notes of July 13 and August 3, 2015, December 21, 2016 and August 9, 2017.

3

Mr. Irvin Madan Dewdath Kanhai.

Select target paragraph3