The Supervisory Board (RvC) of the Telecommunication Authority Suriname (TAS) has filed a formal criminal complaint with the attorney general against former director Wendy Jap-A-Joe and former supervisory board chair Harish Monorath, who is currently Minister of Justice and Security.
The board suspects that the conclusion and implementation of an employment agreement from 2021 involved corrupt acts, unlawful financial favouritism and the deliberate circumvention of statutory oversight procedures.
The criminal complaint of November 5, 2026, submitted by RvC chairman Emanuel Scheek, concerns the employment agreement concluded on November 1, 2021, between TAS and Jap-A-Joe. Monorath signed the document at the time on behalf of the telecommunications authority.
According to the RvC, there are serious indications that Article 13, paragraph 1, of the Anti-Corruption Act may have been deliberately violated in the conclusion of this agreement. The board therefore asks the Public Prosecution Service (OM) to launch an independent criminal investigation into the individual and possible joint responsibility of the two signatories and other officials who may have been involved.
Employment agreement kept outside regular administration for years
One of the most serious allegations concerns the manner in which the employment agreement was handled administratively. According to the RvC, the contract was not found in the usual board files. Information from the head of Human Resources also reportedly indicates that the document is missing from Jap-A-Joe’s personnel file. The former director allegedly also failed, despite repeated requests from the current RvC, to make the agreement and the accompanying approval documents available.
The board suspects that this created the possibility of executing financial entitlements without the authorised supervisors having insight into the underlying arrangements.
The RvC calls it particularly remarkable that Jap-A-Joe, in addition to her position as director, was also an authorised signatory. According to the available information, she alone was authorised to approve payments on behalf of TAS. The board wants an investigation into whether this enabled her to have financial benefits paid out to herself without sufficient independent oversight.
Salary of USD 4,000 and special financial benefits
The criminal complaint shows that the disputed agreement provides for an original gross monthly salary of USD 4,000 and various additional benefits. These include two annual bonuses, representation and expense allowances, holiday allowances, pension provisions and medical facilities for Jap-A-Joe and her family members.
It also includes life insurance with an insured amount of EUR 125,000. In addition, the agreement contains provisions for continued salary payments over an extended period in the event of incapacity for work and the free transfer of a company vehicle upon termination of employment.
Another striking provision concerns a notice period of at least 24 months, followed by a payment of 36 months’ salary and emoluments. According to the complaint, this arrangement applies under the circumstances described in the contract.
The RvC wants the Justice Ministry to investigate why such conditions were agreed upon, who decided on them and whether the competent government bodies approved them. It must also be determined which amounts were actually paid out and whether TAS suffered financial damage as a result.
Possible organised collaborative arrangement
The criminal complaint goes beyond the question of whether Monorath was authorised to sign the employment agreement. According to the RvC, there are indications that may point to a possible organised and purposeful collaborative arrangement between several individuals and public officials. Within such an arrangement, TAS resources and facilities may have been systematically used for purposes outside the institution’s statutory mandate, with those involved financially or materially benefiting themselves or others.
The board therefore also asks the attorney general to investigate whether embezzlement, embezzlement in office, fraud, forgery or other criminal offences may have occurred. It must be established whether certain financial transactions and decisions were deliberately kept out of the sight of supervisors. The RvC emphasises that the ultimate criminal assessment rests with the judicial authorities.
Former ministers must be heard
Another important part of the criminal complaint concerns the absence of the legally required approval for the employment conditions. According to Article 4, paragraph 4, of the Telecommunications Facilities Act, the director’s employment conditions must be determined by the responsible minister, after the RvC has been heard and the Council of Ministers has granted approval. The RvC states that no documents were found in the files examined showing that this procedure was followed.
Former responsible ministers reportedly also indicated, when asked, that they had not been aware of the employment agreement or the employment conditions laid down in it. The RvC therefore asks the OM to formally hear these former ministers and examine the relevant ministerial archives and government decisions.
Judge provisionally suspended agreement
The criminal complaint follows the legal battle over Jap-A-Joe’s position within TAS. On October 26, 2026, the subdistrict court ruled that her statutory term of appointment as director had expired. The judge provisionally suspended the disputed employment agreement until a decision is made in proceedings on the merits regarding its invalidity or legal validity. The Court of Justice upheld the earlier ruling on October 30. As a result, the governance of TAS was provisionally placed with the RvC.
Key News previously reported that the court had upheld the ruling against Jap-A-Joe. The RvC stresses in the criminal complaint that the court rulings do not establish criminal liability, but according to the board do provide grounds for further investigation into the conclusion and implementation of the agreement.
Monorath maintains that he was authorised
Monorath previously denied that he had forged the employment agreement or drawn it up afterwards. He did confirm that he signed the contract at the time as supervisory board chair. The minister states that he was authorised to conclude the agreement on the basis of a presidential resolution and a decision of the Council of Ministers.
In an earlier statement to Key News, Monorath defended the arrangements and stated that the arrangement for the continuation of the directorship was intended to safeguard administrative continuity. The RvC, however, disputes that approval of the appointment automatically also entails the legally required approval of the employment conditions. A specific response from Monorath and Jap-A-Joe to the criminal complaint of November 5 is not included in the available information.
RvC does not rule out personal liability
In addition to a criminal investigation, the RvC requests the preservation of the original employment agreement, earlier draft versions, digital data and relevant financial documents. According to the board, former and current commissioners, involved personnel officials and other persons involved in the implementation of the agreement must also be heard.
Furthermore, the RvC reserves the right to hold responsible officials personally and, where applicable, jointly and severally liable for damage TAS may have suffered. Copies of the criminal complaint are intended for the government, De Nationale Assemblée (Suriname’s parliament) and the Rekenkamer. It has not yet been confirmed whether the Public Prosecution Service has in fact opened a criminal investigation in response to the criminal complaint.
