St. Martin News Network

Sunday
Oct 26th
Text size
  • Increase font size
  • Default font size
  • Decrease font size

Caravanserai/Alegria Timeshare Owners Affected.

User Rating:  / 0

Many of St. Maarten's timeshare owners either are affected directly or indirectly by the letter sent by the new owning company of what was known as the Caravanserai , which letter stated that their timeshare rights would be annulled. This goes on in a domino effect to also exert a negative influence on the lives of every St. Maarten person as the major source of money in our pockets is courtesy of our main pillar tourism economy.

The St. Maarten Timeshare Association is doing everything it can to encourage our government to become engaged in this issue. We have a confirmed meeting with the Minister of Tourism and Economy, Ted Richardson, the new owner and the SMTA set for October 28th. While draft legislation was prepared by MP Leroy de Weever that would offer the St. Maarten government the ability to actively protect the interests of the timeshare owners, the current law does not offer this tool to help our tourism product.

Although we do not currently have a lot of timeshare specific laws, there are plenty of laws to protect our timeshare owners' interests. As St. Maarten is a Civil Code jurisdiction this means people must hire legal representatives to plead their case before a judge.
The government of St. Maarten can exert its influence to see if cooperation can be obtained, but it has no way to force a private entity to comply in a private matter under the current law.

The SMTA would like to outline several possible options for Caravanserai timeshare owners. The options listed are not recommendations, but rather are put out so that informed choices can be made.

  1.  Sign the Agreement sent out as is by Alegria.
  2.  Hire a law firm to represent you to enforce your timeshare rights. You can do this individually or join a group. Two law firms have communicated to SMTA their interest in providing timeshare owners seeking assistance local legal advice ‎on the matter; Lexwell Attorneys at Law and Bermon Law Offices. Individuals would pay more than if they went as a group. Contacting one of these offices should give a clear indication of the strength of any action.
  3.  Another option would be to do nothing and see what develops. Whichever way you decide, the SMTA will continue to work to make the St. Maarten timeshare product the best it can be for both our valued tourists and our society alike.

Last Updated ( Friday, 24 October 2014 13:35 )

 

‘Suck you blows’ St. Maarten politicians.

User Rating:  / 1

Ever since the Dutch Minister Of Overseas Affairs and Kingdom Relations, Mr. Ronald Plasterk, issued an instruction for the screening of the new ministers for St. Maarten to the Governor of St. Maarten, the island finds itself in a state of pandemonium.
To be clear however and judging from comments and reactions coming from bloggers and from the working-class people, it appears that this very far-reaching measure from the Dutch Government mainly has its effects on politicians, who seem to be very nervous, upset and scrambling for cover, sympathy and popular support.
In other words, while particularly the politicians and their political 'operatives', are the ones screaming the loudest about colonialism, racism and of 'fighting back' - the 'man and woman on the street', are much more neutral, if not outright open-minded to and in favor of the decision by the Dutch to 'intervene' in the screening process in order to stamp out nepotism, corruption and the like.
As far as our St. Martin Grassroots People Movement is concerned - what is happening now, was a long time in coming and was predicted on so many occasions by us as well.
But then again, who was interested in what we have been saying for some 30 odd years now ?
Certainly not those screaming the loudest – our 'honorable' politicians.
And while in recent times, our movement had decided to simply let events take their course, so that people and politicians would be forced to realize that the island is on a collision course – in the midst of this 'melee', we were contacted by a number of politicians from various political parties, looking forward to us giving them support against the Dutch instruction on the new screening measures for ministers.
For this reason, we have decided to publicly address the powers that are - of the following and hope it will suffice - for now.
The St. Martin Grassroots People Movement will - at this time - not get involved in any actions against the decision of the Dutch to give instructions to the Governor on the screening process.
For the record.
Our decision not to get involved against the 'Dutch' under the current circumstances is NOT based on our movement being 'pro-Dutch'.
Whosoever - for their own agenda – would want to believe otherwise – such will not be our concern.
The records all show unequivocally, that we have always been - an independently-minded, non-partisan, non-racial, non- national, very outspoken, 100% pro- grassroots St. Martin People Movement - without apologies - to be clear.
Many times, we have been the proverbial 'lone wolf in the desert' - a position we felt very comfortably with, as a matter of fact for the simple reason that we passionately believe in our vision and mission for this island.
Therefore, our movement, is not one that can easily - if at all - be fooled, intimidated, coerced and manipulated into thinking that the 'Dutch' - or any other people for that matter - are the real problem for the native, indigenous St. Martin people and for the country in general.
They are NOT – our own ignorance, lack of principles, lack of knowledge of- and love for 'Self' are our greatest enemies.
Our position in this regards, has been very clear, simple, logical and consistent over the years.
A monumental and historical case in point is the following;
When in the past, our own local St. Maarten politicians - NOT the Dutch - did EVERYTHING possible to break up the Antilles in order to get separate-status - I, Leopold James, along with the late Eldrige van Putten and with Elco Rosario, former notary went to the extreme to warn the politicians and the people, that it was NOT in the best interest of us as a people.
We were ridiculed and systematically denied access to many talk-shows on the island.
Consequently, the politicians had a 'field-day', 'spoon-feeding' the public with their specific and biased agenda.
In that process, the politicians deliberately 'set up' the St. Martin people against 'Curacao' and promised that with the new status, we would be able to do 'We own ting' (= the politicians filling their own pockets based on deals at the expense of the people).
We (= the politicians ) would eliminate the 'middle man' (= the Central Government/Curacao) and deal directly with Holland.
Our brilliant politicians were so 'bloody' eager and greedy for getting complete power at home, that they swallowed 'hook, line and sinker' the legal implications of being in the Kingdom as a 'country' within the Dutch Kingdom.
Consequently, they took completely for granted (= not to mean much) the 'Guarantee- function' of the Kingdom-Government for good governance and along with the Dutch SIGNED OFF to these provisions.
Now, that the Dutch Government is simply executing, what it is legally bound to do and to which our politicians agreed upon with their signatures - this action of the Dutch is now being construed by our local politricians, to be some form of 'colonial interference', racism etc.
Oh really ?
If, that really is the case, then who are the greatest fools for having agreed to those 'colonial' intervention provisions for the new and highly coveted 'Country status' dream to become a reality ?
As a matter of fact, we always stated, that the day of 'reckoning' would come and that the politicians would have to give an account to the people of St. Maarten for what they did to the people of the island.
For one, Why is it, that since they broke up the Antilles, we are no longer protected (as Antilleans were in the former Antilles) and why we are currently being completely overrun by hordes of bold, illegal, exploding numbers of non-added value, immigrants.
In ending - we the St. Martin Grassroots People Movement - once more state the following.
Unless and until, our politicians correct the deliberate 'mistake' and betrayal of the native, indigenous St. Martin people by refusing to recognize us and to protect our rights in the constitution – we consider those politicians the greatest problem and threat to the very existence of our people and NOT the Dutch.
Had our own politicians not thrown us under the proverbial bus - but had recognized us as a people and had protected our rights in the Constitution never to become marginalized and threatened to become victims of genocide by substitution – our position would have been completely different today.
Therefore - until such time - our 'honorable' politicians, should not hold their breath on any support from our side - they are free to 'suck their blows' all by themselves – it's all about the law of Karma.

Drs. Leopold James
President of the St. Martin Grassroots People Movement.
Copies
St. Maarten Parliament
Dutch Parliament
UN etc.

Last Updated ( Sunday, 19 October 2014 17:11 )

Open Letter to MP Bosman

User Rating:  / 2

Bloem Bonapart & Aardenburg Ill
Attorneys at Law 1 Advokaten

OPEN LETTER TO MR. A. BOSMAN Present
St. Maarten, October 19th, 2014

Re: Erroneous, slanderous and defaming statements

Dear Mr. Bosman,

On behalf of the Minister of Public Health Social Development and Labor, Mr. V.H.C. de

Weever, client, I request your urgent attention for the following.

I refer to the following media publications:

1. The Daily Herald in Sint Maarten on, Tuesday, September 30th, 2014: " According to VVD Member of the Second Chamber Andre Bosman, De Weever was "simply bought" by Heyliger" 1;
2. The Today Newspaper Sint Maarten, published on September 30th, 2014: POSTED:

09/30/14 10:55 PM : "According to WD-MP Andre Bosman "Heyliger simply paid De
Weever.2";

3. The Telegraaf, Netherlands, published on Monday, September 29th, 2014: "Volgens

VVD-Kamerlid Bosman is De Weever 'gewoon betaald' door Heyliger. 3
4. Amigoe, Cura<;ao, published on Tuesday, September 30th, 2014: "Volgens WD­ Kamerlid Bosman is De Weever 'gewoon betaald' door Heyliger"

1 http://www.thedailyherald.com/index.php?option=com content&view=article&id=50543:second­

chamber-calls-for-intervention-in-st-maarten&catid=1:islands-news<emid=54

2 http://www.todaysxm.com/2014/09/30/reaction-to-pwc-integrity-report-dutch-want-criminal -investiqation­
into-the-government-of-st-maarten/

3 http://www.teleqraaf.nllbinnenland/23136875/ Onderzoek naar corruptie Si nt-Maarten .html

Juancho Yrausquin I St. Maanen
Bvl d 6 Philipsburg I T + (1721)543 0501
F + ( 1721) 543 0504
info- This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.

www.sxmlegal.com

Pietermaai 23 I Curacao
P.O. Box 113 I T +(5J9)461 38 33
F + (5999 ) 4 61 7662 /4G5 2890 into-curacao®sba-advocaten.com

Kaya Grandi 91 I BonaiJe
P.O. Bo x 356 I F+(599) 717 5 417
T +(599) 7175412 I 717 541 4
info-bonaire@sba-advocatenc. om

Bloem Booapan & Aadenburg is de handelsnaam van Advocatenkantoor Bloem N.V. De algemeoe VOOIWaarden van Bloem Bonapan & Aa-burg. waann een beperung
van aansprakel1jkheid is opgenomen. ZlJO op aile opdrachten van toepas ng. De voorwaaiden worden op venoek IOegeZOnden. maar zjn eveneens te vinden op
ooze website. Bloem Booapan & Aanlenburg is 11>e trade name of Advoca!enkantoor Bloem N.V. Bloem Bonapan & Aanlenburg's general terms and conditions. M>ch indude
a lmtaoon on habo.ty. are apphcable to aU wen performed. The general lemls are avaslable on request or at our website.

Attorneys at Law I Advokaten

To date you did not repudiate these statements that consequently appear to have indeed been made by you. If this is incorrect, please inform me accordingly. The remaining part of this letter is based on the likely premise that you indeed made referenced statements that by the way were quoted in exactly the same manner in at least four different newspapers.

The contentions that you made lack factual basis and are moreover slanderous and/or defamatory towards client. Your publications and/or public statements are untruthful, grievous and deliberately slanderous as per article 6 :167 of the Sint Maarten Civil Code. Moreover, the verbiage used violates the honor and good reputation of client which constitutes slander as per our Penal Code.

The expressions furthermore violate the duty of care that must be safeguarded in respect to other persons in society. By expressing yourself in the manner described, you have moreover committed a tortuous act against client.

I furthermore note in this respect that your contentions do not serve any -general- interest. They intend to deliberately jeopardize the good name and reputation of client and because
of this alone there cannot be any objective justification for the disputed actions caso quo

publications.

Your unfounded and untruthful comments actually cause severe damage to the reputation of country Sint Maarten and consequently in a broader sense also reflect negatively on the Dutch Kingdom. Within the International Community credence might be unjustly given to your untruthful, defaming statements, made with seemingly no regard or concern for
the financial, economic and social ramifications for client and country Sint Maarten, and for

latter's position within the Dutch Kingdom.

Client has reasons to believe that you will continue to deliberately tarnish his good name and reputation by means of untruthful, grievous and deliberate slanderous expressions. The fact that to this date you did not make any effort to distant yourself from the disputed statement(s) or otherwise provide any evidence therefor, only further strengthens client in his belief.

Attorneys at Law 1 Advokaten
By law you are obliged to verify the sources and accurateness of the contention(s) you make, even if you perceive this source to be correct. The thoroughness of that investigation must be proportionate to the severity of the accusations made. In the underlying case it is highly unlikely that you performed any investigation. Please note that by law you cannot hide behind alleged rumors or public statements which may have been made by others.

In light of the severity of the accusations made, your lack of -proper- investigation constitutes a violation of your duty to act diligently, which makes the statement(s) illegal. Your accusations were so severe that you were not entitled to make them, at least not without a thorough research and/or thoughtful reflection/consideration, concerning accurateness.

Client expresses the sincere hope that you will not attempt to hide behind your Parliamentary Immunity. Please note that a possible claim by you on Parliamentary Immunity would in any case not protect you from your civil and criminal liability in this matter, since you -also- made the disputed statements outside of Parliament. Invoking Parliamentary Immunity would instead reflect on your willingness to accept responsibility for the truthfulness of the statements that you made and as such reflect on your person and personality.

It would honor you, certainly in view of the manner in which you portray yourself as a straightforward, equitable and honorable person, to retract your incorrect and unsubstantiated statements out of your own volition. Moreover, since this would limit the damages suffered by client and country Sint Maarten to date.

You are hereby summoned to refrain from making any further factually incorrect, grievous and slanderous comment about client and notified that client reserves the right to start legal actions against you. Please also note that client holds you personally and severally responsible for the monetary equivalent of all damages he suffered and will suffer as a consequence of your illegal actions. You are hereby given notice of the legal interest on the monetary equivalent of client's damages as of today.

Bloem Bonapart & Aardenburg II
--AttoJneys at Law I Advokaten
Sin ererV, '

Last Updated ( Sunday, 19 October 2014 14:42 )

To our new 15 Honorable Members of Parliament.

User Rating:  / 1

I salute you and I wish you God's guidance as you go about doing the people's work, defending and representing Country St. Maarten and her people.

You are Honorable Members of Parliament. You are NOT MP's.
For the salary that we are paying you, the chairpersons as well as each one of you must take the extra time and refer to each other as Honorable Members of Parliament.

There are two clichés that I want you to dispel so that you would not use them nor pay attention to them.
To go independent:
In our political terminology this applies to a Member of Parliament who leaves one party or grouping to stand on his/her own.
To jump ship:
In our political terminology, this means leaving one party or grouping to join another party or grouping.

You took an oath and based on that, all 15 of you are Independent Honorable Members of Parliament. The only grouping that is recognized is the grouping that agrees to appoint the ministers. After the ministers have been appointed by a minimum of 8 Members of Parliament, the majority, in Parliament, gives directions to the ministers.
This means that each of you can support or reject any idea or motion that comes to the floor, regardless to who presents it.
We want to hear WHY you support or reject every idea or motion that comes to the floor.
No more simply voting for or against, along party lines. For the salary we are paying you, we deserve an explanation/motivation and not just a 'for or against'.
We do not believe that the group of 8 or more is always right and the others are always wrong.

There is this crazy idea that the executive branch does its own thing and the legislative does its own thing.
That must be a thing of the past.
The most important law, that you have to legislate on, is the BUDGET.
That is the law that the ministers have to comply with, as per your instructions.
Every minister must come to Parliament to present and defend his/her budget.
The minister of finance must act as a controller to advise ministers and Parliament when monies are not being used properly, what monies are received, not received and spent. His/her duty is also to set fiscal policies, with the approval of Parliament.
There must a limit to the amount that a minister can commit the country to, without approval of parliament.

These ministers must be appointed for 4 years. Changing alliances, is no reason for changing a minister. If a minister does not perform properly, there must be a possibility to dismiss him/her. This should be done in a Parliamentary meeting, at which time the minister must be given the opportunity to defend himself. There should be special arbitration in such a case.

We believe that there must be a change to our electoral laws.
I have my suggestion, that I have been hammering on over the years and I will present it to you.

Once again, I wish you God's blessings and guidance as you defend and represent Country St. Maarten and her people.

Clifton R. Wilson

Last Updated ( Sunday, 12 October 2014 19:22 )

Picture THIS!‏

User Rating:  / 1

Cornelius de Weever starts his DP campaign with the grandiose statement: "I will accept no donations from third parties, as I want to owe nobody and be able to vote my conscience". He goes on to slide into the #2 vote-getter spot on the DEMOCRATIC Party list (without getting enough votes to elect himself). Every last DP vote was used to put Cornelius de Weever in the next Parliament of St. Maarten. The DP got together with the USP (2) and the NA (4) to make the needed majority and negotiated 2 Ministries for its 2 seats. Our party leader choose to go to Parliament and our second MP-elect Cornelius de Weever got first pick: Stay in Parliament or become a Minister. And then came what I term a "Leroy special": Cornie choose Parliament and suggested to the DP to appoint his aunt to the post of Minister. He explained that "the position needs some one who cares for people on St. Maarten, not a business person who really does not understand the needs of our population", ( Emil Lee??). The suggestion is immediately shot down by the Leader of the DP, supported by the party top then present. Fast forward to September 24th. Cornie signs up with 7 UP MP's-elect, but does not (up to today, Sunday, October 6, 2014) resign from the Democratic Party. Whether the Governor in his role to coordinate the forming of a new government, is dealing with one political party and a renegade MP-elect, or 8 renegade MP's-elect, either way, Cornie and Leroy are poised to become King Makers on the backs of the people that voted for all the candidates on the Democratic Party slate, with the financial support of donors to the Democratic Party (remember, Cornie gallantly said he would take NOT a penny from third parties, but yet, he proudly wore his DP#2 T- shirts and smiled at you from life sized posters, all paid for by the same DP Donors he "stood up against"). So picture this: As Leroy is officially out of a job come 10/10/14 is it possible that he will become Prime Minister, or Minister of Health while Cornie sits in Parliament and together they determine the fate of Theo's government? My vote is for Sarah, William and Frans to form the United Democratic Alliance opposition block of 7 in Parliament, and wait for this coalition of 8 to implode. It is bound to happen.

Michael J. Ferrier

Last Updated ( Tuesday, 07 October 2014 21:17 )