Sewcharan told the Court that Jap-A-Joe’s five-year appointment term expired on October 19, 2026. According to him, this also ended her authority to act as director of the TAS. The attorney states that the Raad van Commissarissen (RvC, Supervisory Board) has been responsible for the management of the telecom authority since October 20.
The third and, according to Sewcharan, legally most interesting issue concerns the employment agreement on which Jap-A-Joe relies. She argues that this agreement protects her rights and that her legal position did not automatically end when the appointment term expired.
Statutory procedure not followed, according to attorney
Sewcharan argues that the employment agreement of November 1, 2021, was not concluded in accordance with the Wet Telecommunicatievoorzieningen.
Under Article 4, paragraph 4 of this law, the director’s employment conditions must be determined by the minister of Transport, Communicatie en Toerisme (TCT), after the Raad van Commissarissen has been heard and prior approval has been obtained from the Raad van Ministers.
According to the attorney, these statutory requirements were not observed when the agreement with Jap-A-Joe was concluded.
The document was signed by Jap-A-Joe and the then president-commissioner of the TAS. Sewcharan states that there is no indication that the full RvC was heard, that the minister was involved in its conclusion, or that the Raad van Ministers granted approval.
On this basis, he concludes that the agreement cannot form a legal basis for the continuation of her directorship.
Appointment resolution covered Jap-A-Joe’s functioning
Asked whether this means that Jap-A-Joe had functioned as director without a valid legal basis over the past five years, Sewcharan answered in the negative.
According to him, her functioning during that period was legally covered by the presidential appointment resolution. That resolution determined both her appointment and its duration.
The attorney also disputes the position that a separate dismissal resolution from the president is necessary to end the directorship.
According to Sewcharan, the appointment ends automatically when the term set in the resolution expires. An agreement concluded by a lower body cannot, according to him, override the content of a presidential resolution.
Should the president decide to reappoint Jap-A-Joe as director, Sewcharan says a new appointment resolution would be required, effective October 20, 2026.
Legal position remains subject of dispute
Jap-A-Joe and her attorneys dispute that the expiry of the appointment term automatically ends her contractual rights.
At first instance, she had asked the court to suspend the transfer of management and related measures until clarity on her legal position could be obtained in proceedings on the merits.
The cantonal court rejected that claim on Monday, October 26. It was also determined that Jap-A-Joe could no longer act on behalf of the TAS and had to transfer her management responsibilities.
The court provisionally suspended the implementation of the employment agreement insofar as it concerns the continuation of the directorship and the powers attached to it after October 20, 2026. The definitive legal validity of the agreement may have to be decided in proceedings on the merits.
Jap-A-Joe has appealed the ruling. Her defence, led by attorney Iris Nazir, wants the Court to overturn the earlier decision.
Sewcharan expects ruling soon
Sewcharan acknowledges that the legal proceedings are taking up the TAS’s work. Representatives of the authority must make time for the court case while regular work continues.
Nevertheless, he is confident of an outcome favourable to the TAS.
The appeal is being heard by a panel of three judges of the Hof van Justitie. Sewcharan expects the Court to issue a ruling in the near term.
Ultimately, it is up to the Court to assess whether the cantonal court’s decision will be upheld, amended or overturned.
