8. On August 22, 2003, the Commission received the Petitioner’s petition dated July 20, 2003. By letters of November 24, 2003 and February 4, 2004, the Petitioner submitted further information on his petition to the Commission. By letter of October 6, 2004, the Commission requested the Petitioner to provide further information, which the Petitioner provided by letters of November 8, 2004 and November 17, 2004. 9. By letter of April 18, 2005, the Commission transmitted the pertinent parts of the Petitioner’s petition to the State, and requested the State to respond within two months. By communication of June 10, 2005, the State requested an extension of three months to respond. By letter of June 15, 2005, the Commission granted the State an extension to July 18, 2005 to respond. By letter of the same date, the Commission advised the Petitioner of the extension granted to the State. 10. By note of July 18, 2005, the State submitted its official response to the petition, the pertinent parts of which were transmitted to the Petitioner by letter of July 21, 2005. The Commission requested the Petitioner to respond within a month. By letter of July 27, 2005, the Petitioner requested an extension of one month to reply, which was granted by the Commission by communication of August 17, 2005. 11. By letter of September 8, 2005, the Petitioner submitted his observations on the State’s response. By note of November 29, 2005 the Commission transmitted the pertinent parts of the Petitioner’s observations to the State, requesting a response within a month. By note of December 29, 2005, the State requested an extension of two months to respond. The Commission granted the requested extension by note of January 5, 2006. 12. By communications of March 3, 2006 and April 7, 2006, the State submitted its response as requested. By letter of April 18, 2006, the Commission transmitted the pertinent parts of the State’s response to the Petitioner, who responded by letter of May 9, 2006. The pertinent parts of the Petitioner’s response to the State were transmitted to the State by the Commission by note of June 12, 2006, to which the State responded by communications of July 7, 2006 and July 10, 2006. III. A. POSITIONS OF THE PARTIES The Petitioner 13. The Petitioner was the Minister of Natural Resources and Minister of Finance of Suriname (1996-2000). He claims that in his capacity as Minister of Finance, he implemented a July 2000 decision of the Suriname Government to purchase a complex of buildings to house various Government ministries and departments. 14. In August 2000, (after demitting office) the Petitioner was indicted under Suriname’s Indictment of Political Office Holders Act ('the Act'), for allegedly: a) purchasing the building complex at an excessive price; b) purchasing the building complex without obtaining the approval of the Council of Ministers; 2