TAS Supervisory Board seeks clarification over halted CLAD investigation and announces new inquiries

The president-commissioner of TAS, Emanuel Scheek, stated this on Monday, October 26, 2026, in response to the court ruling in the governance dispute involving former director Wendy Jap-A-Joe. According to him, obtaining clarity on the administrative and financial situation within the organisation is one of the RvC’s most important assignments. “This is only the beginning. We must establish exactly what took place at the Telecommunicatie Autoriteit Suriname,” the president-commissioner said.

Questions over suspension of investigation

An important point of attention is the CLAD investigation that had previously been initiated but was subsequently suspended. Scheek says he cannot explain why this investigation was terminated, because the decision was not taken by the RvC. According to information he has received, CLAD would moreover not be independently authorised to discontinue an investigation. Whether that was the case in this instance must be clarified, according to him. The RvC will therefore send a formal letter to the president and the ministers concerned to obtain clarity on the circumstances under which the investigation was terminated.

Debate over Jap-A-Joe’s position

The president-commissioner further says that contacts with CLAD have shown that the service had initially not been formally informed of the end of Wendy Jap-A-Joe’s directorship. According to him, Jap-A-Joe was therefore still regarded by CLAD as director. The RvC subsequently sent a letter, attaching the letter from the TCT minister which, according to the board, showed that her term of appointment had expired. Scheek states that clarity regarding authority within TAS is necessary, including to prevent information and documents from being provided without the required authorisation.

Investigations without prejudice

The RvC now wants the previously requested investigations to be carried out to determine what took place within the organisation and whether there were any irregularities. According to the president-commissioner, it must also become clear whether individuals can be held responsible for certain actions. He stresses that the board does not want to declare anyone guilty in advance. “Oversight is not an act of hostility,” he says.

According to him, the RvC had tried for a prolonged period to exercise its statutory supervisory duties, but this was, he says, obstructed. He states that an investigation may also show that there were no irregularities. In that case, according to him, the discussion about the functioning of the organisation could be conducted on the basis of facts.

No new director for the time being

According to the president-commissioner, the outcomes of the investigations are also decisive for the appointment of a new TAS director. He refers to agreements with the government and the position previously expressed by President Jennifer Simons. According to him, no new appointment resolution will be issued before the necessary investigations have been completed.

Even if the Raad van Ministers approves a nomination for a new director, this does not mean that an appointment will immediately follow, according to him. Scheek stresses that appointing a new director is not within the authority of the RvC, but of the competent government authority.

According to him, it must first be established exactly what the new director will be taking over. This must prevent a new executive from being confronted with unknown administrative or financial problems. The RvC wants the investigation results ultimately to provide a clear picture of TAS’s condition and of which measures are needed to further manage the organisation.