VZCZCXRO5720
RR RUEHGR
DE RUEHPO #0070/01 0341854
ZNR UUUUU ZZH
R 031854Z FEB 06
FM AMEMBASSY PARAMARIBO
TO RUEHC/SECSTATE WASHDC 8031
INFO RUCNCOM/EC CARICOM COLLECTIVE
RUEHAO/AMCONSUL CURACAO 0942
RUEHTC/AMEMBASSY THE HAGUE 1510

UNCLAS SECTION 01 OF 02 PARAMARIBO 000070 
 
SIPDIS 
 
SIPDIS 
 
SENSITIVE 
 
DEPT FOR WHA/CAR - LLUFTIG 
PORT OF SPAIN FOR LEGATT 
 
E.O. 12958: N/A 
TAGS: SNAR PREL KCRM PGOV NS
SUBJECT: DUTCH HIGH COURT REJECTS BOUTERSE REQUEST TO 
RECONSIDER HIS DRUG CONVICTION 
 
REFS: (A) PARAMARIBO 39 (B) PARAMARIBO 43 (C) 05 
 
PARAMARIBO 751 
 
PARAMARIBO 00000070  001.2 OF 002 
 
 
¶1. (SBU) Summary. On January 31 the Dutch High Court 
rejected a request by former Surinamese military dictator 
and opposition party leader Desi Bouterse to reopen the case 
surrounding his 1999 conviction for narcotics trafficking. 
The decision appears to end Bouterse's long quest to have 
his conviction overturned, which could have rescinded the 
Interpol warrant against him and allowed him to travel 
freely outside Suriname.  The judgment also has an impact on 
his political maneuvering room. (See reftels). End Summary. 
 
¶2. (U) In July 1999 a Dutch Court in the Hague found 
Bouterse guilty in absentia on six of seven counts for 
narcotics trafficking and a related charge for a combined 
sentence of 16 years. When he appealed in 2000, the appeals 
court acquitted him of five of the six counts citing 
unreliable witness testimony.  However, the court upheld one 
guilty verdict for Bouterse's alleged role in the 
transportation of 474 kilos of cocaine from Suriname to the 
Netherlands in 1997 in the Stellendam case. While the court 
of first instance had originally sentenced Bouterse to seven 
years on this count, the appeals court increased the 
sentence to 11 years.  In its decision, the appeals court 
said the testimony of witness Patrick Van Loon was paramount 
in the case.  Bouterse appealed the 11-year sentence to the 
Dutch High Court, but his appeal was rejected on 23 October 
¶2001. 
 
¶3. (U) In 2002 Bouterse and his lawyer began legal 
proceedings to have his case reopened saying new evidence 
had been brought to light.  Bouterse's defense lawyer 
claimed that Van Loon's testimony was only made after 
securing a suspicious, nontransparent deal with the Dutch 
Public Prosecutor's Office to receive a reduced sentence for 
his involvement in another narcotics case.  Bouterse's 
defense also claimed that Van Loon's testimony contradicted 
statements he made in other drug-related investigations, but 
on 4 March 2003 the High Court turned down Bouterse's 
request to reopen his case. 
 
¶4. (U) On 25 July 2005 Bouterse and his Dutch lawyer, Inez 
Weski, submitted a second formal request to reopen the case 
claiming that the public prosecutor's office failed to 
present all available information to the court and had it 
done so, the courts might have ruled differently.  Weski 
also submitted that she had obtained new information from an 
interview with the pilot of the ship that ferried the 
cocaine in the Stellendam case.  According to Weski, Van 
Loon told the pilot that he planned to incriminate Bouterse 
after securing a deal with public prosecutors, despite 
Bouterse having no involvement in the case.  Weski also 
queried before the High Court why an alleged accomplice of 
Bouterse was not prosecuted if the evidence against Bouterse 
had been so solid.  The High Court struck down this last 
appeal on January 31 saying the defense's arguments were 
groundless and were unlikely to lead to a different verdict 
were the case to be reconsidered. 
 
¶5. (SBU) Bouterse and senior members of his NDP political 
party have long argued that his conviction in the 
Netherlands was politically motivated and that the Dutch 
simply want to rid Suriname of Bouterse for their own 
purposes. A local newspaper with the third largest 
circulation, the Times of Suriname, supported this view in 
an editorial immediately following the decision.  When 
questioned how the NDP could allow a criminal with a 
narcotics conviction lead their party and be its 
presidential candidate, NDP officials often use the argument 
that Bouterse was unjustly convicted as their justification. 
On the morning of the May 25 election in 2005, voters awoke 
to front-page headlines conveying assertions from Weski that 
Van Loon had fabricated his story, an announcement very 
likely timed to convince voters that Bouterse's conviction 
would soon be overturned and that voting for him would not 
hinder Suriname's international relations. 
 
-------- 
COMMENT 
-------- 
 
¶6. (SBU) The Dutch High Court's pronouncement puts to rest 
speculation that Bouterse's conviction in absentia for 
narcotics trafficking will one day be overturned.  Barring 
 
PARAMARIBO 00000070  002.2 OF 002 
 
 
some new evidence coming to light, this appears to be his 
last legal option within the Netherlands, although one local 
editorial suggested he seek to appeal to some higher 
European court.  Meanwhile, it remains to be seen how he 
will contend with his murder charges in Suriname.  The 
presiding court continues to deliberate over pre-trial 
defense objections, which must be ruled on before a trial 
can proceed.  By leaving his Interpol warrant intact, the 
Dutch High Court's ruling significantly narrows Bouterse's 
options for leaving Suriname to avoid prosecution, assuming 
that was an avenue he would consider.  It also undermines 
his public charm offensive to present himself as an 
upstanding political leader simply being subjected to 
politically-motivated persecution. 
 
LEONARD