PHILIPSBURG:--- The Sint Maarten Tax Administration is pleased to announce that number plates within the MF and V categories, which were previously unavailable, are now ready for collection. Motorists who have already completed payment and are awaiting their plates are encouraged to visit the Receiver’s Office on Pond Island to collect them.

Motorists who were issued temporary M plates are requested to return these plates in order to receive their assigned V or R number plate.

To collect your number plate, motorists must present the following documents at the service window: proof of payment, valid insurance, and a valid inspection card. Payments can be made online, via bank transfer, or in person at the Receiver’s Office.

Online payments are available via the online portal at https://services.sintmaartengov.org/ or via bank transfer to the following accounts: WIB USD 324800-05 / XCG 324800-03; RBC USD 8200000403930461 / XCG 8200000005425048.

For payments made via bank transfer, motorists must include their name and vehicle plate number in the payment description. Receipts, stickers, or number plates can be collected at the Receiver’s Office within three to five working days, provided all required documents are presented.

The Tax Administration urges all motorists who have not yet paid for or collected their 2026 motor vehicle stickers to do so at their earliest convenience.

PHILIPSBURG:---  Minister of Tourism, Economic Affairs, Transport and Telecommunication (TEATT) Grisha Heyliger-Marten on Tuesday outlined reforms aimed at improving the ease of doing business, during the Chamber of Commerce and Industry (COCI) Town Hall at the Belair Community Center.

Addressing a cross-section of the business community, the Minister stressed that economic growth requires partnership between the Government and the private sector, supported by trust, dialogue, and collaboration.

A key development is a pilot within the Department of Economic Licenses allowing certain applications to be submitted online, moving toward more accessible and transparent service delivery. This forms part of broader efforts to modernise systems and reduce administrative barriers.

The Minister also acknowledged that unclear requirements often discourage entrepreneurs. An information campaign is therefore being developed to better guide the public on procedures, documentation, and compliance.

Beyond licensing, she highlighted the role of the St. Maarten Small Enterprise Development Centre (SEDC) in supporting entrepreneurs through training and guidance, and pointed to continued focus on economic diversification, including opportunities within the Orange, Green, and Blue economies. The Agri Loans initiative, offering financing at two percent interest, was cited as one example.

The Minister further called for fairness and transparency within the business sector, noting the need to balance support for local businesses with affordability for the community.

She also underscored the importance of initiatives such as COCI’s Start Smart programme, which helps individuals transition from ideas to structured businesses.

Looking ahead, Government is working toward an integrated digital platform where users can apply, track, and manage business processes in one place.

The Minister reaffirmed Government’s commitment to strengthening collaboration with COCI and the wider business community.

PHILIPSBURG: --- A political dispute has emerged within the Unified Resilient St. Maarten Movement (URSM), as party leadership formally requested the immediate resignation of Minister of Public Health, Social Development and Labor, Richinel Brug, who has rejected the request and disputed the claims made against him.

The request was issued in a March 26, 2026, letter from URSM President Brenda Brooks, citing concerns over governance, integrity, and alleged conflicts of interest.

Party Withdraws Support

In the letter, Brooks stated that the party had withdrawn its support for Brug’s continued role both within the party and in government, citing “a pattern of conduct” that raised concerns about governance, cohesion, and adherence to principles of collective responsibility.

The document outlined multiple issues, including:

• Alleged conflicts of interest involving contracts connected to the Minister’s Chief of Staff
• Concerns over a contract awarded to CZAR Management and Consulting B.V., including discrepancies in contract value and payments
• Claims that the Minister deviated from legal and supervisory advice in procurement and appointment processes
• Allegations that public statements by the Minister undermined the Prime Minister and party leadership

The letter also referenced warnings issued to the Minister regarding potential violations of Article 54 of the Landsverordening Materieel Ambtenarenrecht (LMA), and stated that continued actions could result in reputational and institutional harm.

Brooks concluded by stating that the breakdown in the relationship between the Minister and the party was “beyond repair,” and called for his voluntary resignation from both the party and the Council of Ministers.

Minister Rejects Allegations

In a detailed written response dated March 30, 2026, Minister Brug rejected the allegations, describing them as “assumptions, unfounded allegations, and a blatant disregard for the truth.”

Brug stated that:

• He did not violate principles of collective responsibility, asserting that his public statements addressed specific actions taken unilaterally by the Prime Minister
• There were no improper conflicts of interest in relation to contracts or Cabinet roles
• Payments alleged to exceed contract values were “entirely false and without substantiation”
• All relevant contracts and documentation were accessible through official government systems

He also questioned how the party obtained certain internal documents referenced in the letter, suggesting they may have been acquired outside formal legal channels.

Counter-Allegations Raised

In his response, Brug raised additional concerns regarding actions by the Prime Minister and party leadership, including:

• Allegations of political interference in procurement processes
• Claims that confidential information was shared to influence outcomes
• Assertions that directives were issued to civil servants that deviated from established legal procedures
• Concerns about the handling of appointments within government entities, including SZV

He further stated that he had requested an independent investigation, including possible review by the Integrity Chamber.

Dispute Over Contracts and Appointments

A central issue in both letters involves the awarding and management of contracts related to public projects, including a technical expert role and procurement processes linked to SZV.

The party’s letter alleges that tender processes were structured in a way that favored specific individuals connected to the Minister’s Chief of Staff.

Brug, however, maintains that:

• The contract in question was limited in scope and duration and completed within budget
• Subsequent procurement processes were handled independently by SZV
• He had no direct involvement in awarding later contracts

Position on Resignation

Brug stated unequivocally that he does not intend to resign from his ministerial post or party membership, asserting that the allegations against him are unsupported by evidence.

He added that he remains committed to his role and to serving the people of Sint Maarten, while calling for transparency and accountability in addressing the issues raised.

Ongoing Political Tensions

The exchange of letters highlights escalating tensions within the governing party and the broader coalition, with both sides presenting conflicting accounts of governance, integrity, and decision-making.

No formal announcement has been made regarding further action by the party or coalition partners at this time.

Click here to read the letter sent by the board of URSM to Minister of VSA Richinel Brug

Click here for the response from Minister Richinel Brug to the URSM Board

Willemstad, CURACAO:---  A newly released legal advisory has intensified debate over the constitutional role of the Governor of Sint Maarten, concluding that key actions taken by senior government officials earlier this year were carried out without proper legal authority.

The 15-page advisory, authored by Mr. Dr. Ryçond R. Santos do Nascimento, examines a January 2026 conflict within the Sint Maarten government involving the attempted disciplinary action against a senior civil servant serving as Chief of Staff to the Minister of Public Health, Social Development and Labor (VSA).

Origins of the Dispute

The controversy began on January 7, 2026, when the Minister of General Affairs imposed an “order measure” restricting the civil servant’s access to government buildings and IT systems. The action was followed by an attempt to formalize a suspension through a draft national decree.

However, disagreement quickly emerged within the Council of Ministers over who held the authority to impose such measures. The Governor declined to immediately sign the proposed decree, instead calling for further deliberation and legal clarity.

Court Ruling Undermines Government Actions

A decisive turning point came on March 6, 2026, when the Court in Civil Servants’ Affairs ruled that the measure imposed by the Minister of General Affairs was unlawful.

According to the court, the authority to impose such disciplinary measures rests exclusively with the Governor under Article 45 of the National Ordinance on Substantive Civil Service Law. The ruling also found that the Council of Ministers’ subsequent decision regarding the matter was invalid, as it had not been taken by or on behalf of the Governor.

Rejection of Prior Legal Advice

The advisory sharply criticizes earlier legal guidance provided by Prof. Dr. Arjen van Rijn, arguing that it presents an incomplete account of the facts and relies on legal interpretations inconsistent with the court’s findings.

Specifically, the report contends that Van Rijn’s analysis underestimates the independent constitutional role of the Governor, portraying the office as largely bound by the political will of ministers. The new advisory rejects this view, emphasizing that the Governor is not obligated to approve decisions solely because they are supported by the Council of Ministers.

Governor’s Independent Constitutional Role

A central theme of the advisory is the Governor’s dual function within both the national and Kingdom-level constitutional frameworks. The document stresses that the Governor is not merely a ceremonial figure or administrative signatory but holds independent legal responsibility.

According to the analysis:

• The Governor must personally assess the legality of decisions before signing them.
• The office carries both authority and accountability, including potential legal consequences for unlawful acts.
• The Governor may refuse to sign decisions that lack a proper legal basis or conflict with higher laws.

The advisory underscores that reducing the Governor’s role to a “rubber stamp” undermines constitutional safeguards and the rule of law.

Breakdown of Government Coordination

The report also highlights procedural concerns within the government, including:

• A lack of unified position among ministers,
• The exclusion of key ministers from certain deliberations,
• And insufficient recognition of conflict-of-interest rules requiring ministers to recuse themselves.

These factors, the advisory argues, contributed to flawed decision-making and legal uncertainty.

Key Conclusions

The advisory outlines several clear conclusions:

1. The earlier legal advice by Van Rijn should not be followed.
2. The Minister of General Affairs acted outside legal authority when imposing the initial measure.
3. Only the Governor holds the legal authority to impose such disciplinary actions.
4. The Governor has a duty to independently evaluate decisions and is not bound to follow ministerial wishes.

Implications for Governance

The findings have significant implications for governance in Sint Maarten. They reaffirm the importance of constitutional checks and balances and clarify the boundaries between political decision-making and legal authority.

Legal observers note that the case could set a precedent for how conflicts within the executive branch are handled, particularly in situations involving overlapping responsibilities and constitutional interpretation.

As political tensions continue, the advisory may serve as a key reference point in restoring clarity and reinforcing adherence to the rule of law within Sint Maarten’s government.