Vinaora Nivo Slider 3.xVinaora Nivo Slider 3.x
Vinaora Nivo Slider 3.x

Pro Souliga responds to Constitutional Crisis.

May 17th, 2021
Att: Parliaments and Governments of Aruba, Curacao, and St. Maarten
Re: Urgent attention required to looming Constitutional Crisis in the Kingdom;
The urgent top summit of all six islands required.
A. Kingdom Charter now formally invalid
B. Time to make use of the Uruguay amendment in Resolution 945X of December 15, 1955
Dear Honorable Ministers and Members of Parliament:
Introductory remarks:
With the collapse of Het Statuut as will be made clear below, the six islands of the former Netherlands Antilles remain firmly on the United Nations list of Non-Self-Governing Territories. (NSGT’s) and under Article 73 of the UN Charter. All agreements signed with the Government of the Netherlands based on Het Statuut might be unlawful as they might lack legal basis. Liquidity support falls under the responsibility of the Netherlands as part of its obligations under Article 73 of the UN Charter. Governments might be unknowingly violating the UN Charter rights of the people of these islands by needlessly burdening them with loans and other harsh conditions. The islands are therefore urged to examine their status before entering into any further commitments. UN Charter rights belong to the people and may not be recklessly disregarded, especially now that this is being brought to light.
Government of the Netherlands admits the islands were never formally decolonized:
…Voor zover de Staat bekend, is er geen resolutie waarin letterlijk, met zoveel woorden wordt verklaard dat “Article 73 of the United Nations Charter can no longer be applied to the Netherlands Antilles”. (Submitted by the Dutch State to the Court of First Instance on St. Maarten on April 23, 2021)
With that admission, the entire fabric of the Kingdom has become undone. For here the Dutch State admits that the Netherlands Antilles were never decolonized. If the islands were not decolonized they can never, lawfully, form part of any Kingdom of the Netherlands. The Kingdom Charter then becomes null and avoid because the working assumption underlying the Kingdom Charter has always been that the islands were decolonized. With the aforementioned admission, that assumption no longer holds, and Government and Parliament in complying with their constitutional obligations are obliged to bring this matter to the urgent attention of their (“Kingdom?”) partners by holding an urgent inter-island summit.
Background to the debacle:
In a letter dated September 27, 2019, addressed to the “Voorzitter van de Tweede Kamer” Mr. Knops wrote:
1. …Surniname en de Nederlandse Antillen werden verwijderd van de lijst van niet zelfbesturende gebieden (NSGT’s) van de VN.
2. Thans, na een nadere juridische analyse van de materie is haar (Het Koninkrijk) positie dat artikel 73 VN Handvest sedert de totstandkoming van Het Statuut niet meer van toepassing is.
In light of these declarations, therefore, on February 15, 2021, Pro Soualiga requested the Minister of Foreign Affairs, under whose portfolio the Kingdom’s UN representation falls, to provide the UN Resolution in which the UN declares:
Chapter XI (Art. 73) of the Charter of the United Nations can no longer be applied to the Netherlands Antilles.
On April 23, 2021, during a court hearing on the matter, the Minister of Foreign affairs by way of his legal representation informed the Court and Pro Soualiga that:
…Voor zover de Staat bekend, is er geen resolutie waarin letterlijk, met zoveel woorden wordt verklaard dat “Article 73 of the United Nations Charter can no longer be applied to the Netherlands Antilles”. (Submitted by the Dutch State to the Court of First Instance on St. Maarten op April 23, 2021)
The legal ramifications of that admission are far-reaching and have provoked a constitutional crisis for the following reasons:
Pro Soualiga knows, with 100% certainty that the UN never “verwijderd” the former Netherlands Antilles from the list. The islands were omitted from the list of NSGT’s in 1963 due to an administrative oversight by the UN Committee charged with updating the list in 1963.
Secondly, as the Minister of Foreign Affairs confirmed, and Pro Soualiga knows from other sources, the UN never formally declared the Netherlands Antilles decolonized, therefore the islands are still formally on the UN list of NSGT.
Anatomy of the Crisis:
These two facts taken together mean that the Kingdom and, Het Statuut, do not have a legal basis, since the entire premise underlying the Kingdom Construct was that the islands were decolonized. As the UN did not declare that “Chapter XI no longer applies” there is no legal basis for removing them from the list of NSGT’s and they, therefore, can never join any
“Kingdom”. The center no longer holds, and the entire fictitious “Kingdom of the Netherlands” has collapsed. The point in fact is, it never came into existence!
Urgent Summit:
The six islands of the former Netherlands Antilles, therefore, need to call an urgent top summit to discuss the way forward. The collapse of the Kingdom Charter means that the legal basis for Coho, indeed the entire legal basis for liquidity support has evaporated. The Kingdom of the Netherlands prides itself on being a “rechtstaat” so it cannot ignore this legal fact. On November 26, 2020, the Second Chamber adopted a motion calling on the Dutch State to take legal action against the Polish State because they believed that:
“de Poolse rechtsstaat hierdoor ernstig wordt bedreigd, terwijl de rechtsstaat het fundament van onze Europese Unie is.”
The Dutch State therefore cannot be concerned about affairs in Poland, while ignoring affairs within in its own borders.
Making use of the Uruguay amendment:
Fortunately, added to the UN Resolution 945X of December 1955 lies the Uruguay Amendment:
The representative of Uruguay had explained that he submitted this amendment because the Netherlands Antilles and Surinam were still not fully self-governing. The amendment was intended to offer the peoples of the Netherlands Antilles and Surinam “a safeguard, an opportunity of coming at a later date to knock at the door of the United Nations, should the need arise. (525th Meeting, p 315, viz. Hillebrink p. 224)
This amendment binds the United Nations General Assembly, legally and morally to receive a delegation of duly elected representatives of the six islands without the need of any sponsor nor the Netherlands Government, a unique and rare opportunity afforded to but a few. The time has arrived to seize that opportunity. To ignore an appeal to this amendment would deprive the United Nations of all moral authority which the UN would never tolerate. Once at the UN, the islands should respectfully request the UN to formally relist them as NSGT’s and proceed immediately to their decolonization, terminating, after 65 years, with a UN resolution which states: “Chapter XI can no longer be applied to the islands of the former Netherlands Antilles.”
Coda
We can appreciate that this information might appear quite new and confusing. Pro Soualiga can assure you that it is, in its essentials, 100% accurate. Pro Soualiga and its sister foundation, Korsow Na Kaminda Pa Libertat, possess all the relevant information and documentation to assist the islands in their decolonization and are ready and prepared to do so.
Sincerely,
Renate Brison
Secretary
Pro Soualiga Foundation


Brison sends letter to PM on the finalization decolonization process.

Philipsburg, May 14th, 2021

Ref: finalization decolonization process

 

Honorable Prime Minister,
In keeping with the motion passed by Parliament on November 5th, 2020, I would hereby like to inform you as follows:

Before and after the passing of the motion and the establishment of Parliament’s Permanent Committee for Constitutional Affairs and Decolonization (CCAD) a number of developments have taken place. Two of those are the following:

• The sentiments as expressed in the Dutch Senate (“Eerste Kamer”) during the debate with the State Secretary of Kingdom Relations on April 6th, 2021,
• The motion presented by Senator Paul Rosenmöller on April 6th, 2021 and passed by the Dutch Senate on April 13th, 2021.

All these developments underscore the need to finalize the process and have created a solid basis for doing so expeditiously.

The core of that basis is the consensus between Aruba, Curaçao, Sint Maarten, and the Netherlands that the current Kingdom Charter (“Statuut”) needs to be structurally amended.

In that light, the positions of a number of political parties in the Netherlands as outlined in their respective party manifestos where it relates to (the future) Kingdom relations, coupled with the aforementioned sentiments and motion of the Senate of the Netherlands and the subsequent follow-up offer a good opportunity to start deliberations within the Kingdom to finalize the decolonization process.

The Netherlands is an important, if not the main partner when it comes to finalizing the decolonization process. As such, the ongoing formation process in the Netherlands offers all partners involved a unique opportunity to jointly establish the structure for finalizing the decolonization process in place.

In doing so, a simplified structure of the process for the dismantling of the former Netherlands Antilles which took place between 2005 and 2010 can be used as a point of departure, supported by the documentation and research gathered since then.

Please allow me to (re-)emphasize that this process is a deliberative one. It should and will therefore not interfere with the current ongoing negotiations between the Government of Sint Maarten and that of the Netherlands regarding financial support and governmental reform.

I hereby kindly suggest that you send a proposal to the Kingdom Council of Ministers, in your capacity as Minister charged with General Affairs, to initiate the finalization of the decolonization process based on, among other things, the relevant motions of the Parliament and Senate of the Netherlands and the Parliament of Sint Maarten.

The proposed objective is to organize at least one initial Kingdom Conference/Round Table Conference with the six islands in the Dutch Caribbean in the latter part of this year, and one or more subsequent formal rounds of political consultations in order to finalize the process, with a joint technical support team preparing these consultations.

The Parliament of Sint Maarten, in its capacity of legislator, will of course support and facilitate this process and play its part in close communication and cooperation with all involved where and when required and possible.

As such, a copy of this letter will also be sent to both the Dutch Parliament and Senate, in order to inform them accordingly and initiate a joint discussion on the legislative actions required to support and finalize the process.

I thank you in advance for your kind cooperation and look forward to moving the process forward in a constructive and inclusive manner with all involved.

Sincerely,

On behalf of the Parliament of Sint Maarten,

 

Rolando Brison
President

 

Cc.: Mr. Garrick Richardson, Secretary General of Parliament;
The Chair of CCAD;
De Eerste Kamer der Staten-Generaal;
De Tweede Kamer der Staten-Generaal
The Parliament of Aruba
The Parliament Curaçao
The Island Council of Bonaire
The Island Council Saba
The Island Council Sint Eustatius

Open letter to State Secretary Raymond Knops.

DEAR MISTER KNOPS

Whereas your ceremony this week - in the round - will be populated by a nepotistic circus of agreeable senior civil servants, please do not fall sick.
Mister Knops, if you do, let me describe what roundabouts sick Statians have to go round for medical treatment from your hopeless health insurance organization (ZVK).
For many years, ZVK has wasted millions of Antillean Guilders, US Dollars, Colombian Pesos, and therefore Euros through the false economy on travel costs, delayed medical treatment, and administrative inertia.
It seems your ZVK knows a lot more than you do when it comes to telling lies. But not saving lives...
Forget roundabouts and let me quote an example of administrative ZVK failure only last week from a patient who has waited a painful nine months for a hip replacement.
ZVK informed the patient that a hip operation was possible in Curacao even though the hospital concerned was not conducting such operations due to the Covid pandemic. They, therefore, refused medical referral to the Netherlands. Let's quote from a recent article in the Bone & Joint Journal: "It is not benign to delay or deny patients arthroplasty surgery; patients live with pain and disability that is more severe than many other chronic health conditions."
ZVK in Bonaire informed the patient that they do not want to talk to them but they should talk to Statia doctor. The only solution was to have the operation in the Netherlands. ZVK then said that the patient should organise it all themselves - which they did. The patient was told to pay all costs upfront and be reimbursed later. But confirmation that the entire medical costs would be reimbursed in full, only arrived at the very last moment so that the hospital operation and flights to Schiphol had to be canceled. Patient never received anything on paper.
At one point, a Bonaire ZVK official refused to discuss the situation on the phone. Imagine that from a health insurance organization? The result is that the patient is now taking expensive and addictive pain-relieving pills per day that cost more than a hip operation in the long run. False economy? You bet Mister Knops.
Dear Mister Knops, it is time to reorganize. Many ZVK complaints have been logged and nothing happens. In 2018, The Dutch Government took over local government on Statia in the belief that corruption and abuse diluted the principles of good and efficient governance. How ZVK operates does not seem the epitome of efficiency or care about patients, to say the least. Or: now that you have made your rare hospital bed, it is time to lie in it.
Please reorganize the ZVK or your reputation or both. We do not need local roundabouts but a central government turn-around. We need a ZVK that cares about individual healthcare not saving money. Privatize or revalitize!
Your ZVK is about saving money not caring for customers that have to go around thousands of useless roundabouts very much like the one you are opening this week.
Since your role already serves as a source of fortune, I wish you fortitude and clarity to do the right thing.
Please do not fall sick! You may be a caretaker Minister but your ZVK falls very short of caretaking.


E.B.
(I prefer using only my initials - Statia is a very small island ...)

 

Open letter to PM Jacobs from UP Faction Leader Grisha Heyliger

Member of the Parliament of Sint Maarten



The Hon. Prime Minister of St. Maarten
Ms. Silveria Jacobs
Government Administration Building
Soualiga Road #1
Pond Island, Philipsburg
Sint Maarten

Honorable Prime Minister,
The recent developments related to Princess Juliana International Airport (PJIA) are deeply concerning, and raise many questions about one of the two biggest assets of Sint Maarten and its people.
Based on the information received from representatives of PJIA during previous meetings with Parliament and the Minister of TEATT, and information that has been circulating in the media, it appears that PJIA and its reconstruction are at the center of a dangerous and highly politicized process involving many other stakeholders other than PJIA itself. Two of these stakeholders seem to be the Royal Schiphol Group (RSG) and State Secretary Knops (BZK).
PJIA has been of crucial importance to the development and prosperity of Sint Maarten and its people for the last 75 years. As a nation, we have managed to develop our national airport into the leading airport in the Caribbean that it was, at least up to hurricane Irma. And even right after the devastation caused by Irma, the local management and staff were able to bring it back to where it is now.
I, therefore, consider it unacceptable, and an insult to the people of Sint Maarten that PJIA is currently being used as a political tool by two Dutch stakeholders, using the threat of withholding previously agreed and approved funding to (once again) impose a Dutch agenda on the Government of Sint Maarten.
Information presented to Parliament by PJIA recently, as well as letters of concern from other crucial PJIA stakeholders seem to indicate that the reconstruction process leaves much to be desired. This lack of progress and clarity exists despite the involvement of said two Dutch stakeholders who were supposed to bring added value to the entire deal in terms of funding, knowledge, and (operational) support.
Wilhelminastraat # 1, Philipsburg, Sint Maarten
Tel: + (1-721) 542-0812 / 542-0635 | Fax: + (1-721) 542-0306 Email: This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it. | www.sxmparliament.org




This fact makes the (timing of the) tactics they are currently employing to pressure the Government of Sint Maarten even more questionable and reprehensible. As such, they only reconfirm the fact that Sint Maarten has not been fully decolonized, and needs to work on completing this process as soon as possible.
While the latter process is being worked on, and with reference to the recent developments related to PJIA and the role of the Government (i.e. the Council of Ministers and/or your office), I am hereby urgently seeking answers from your office and/or PJIA (PJIAE and/or PJIAH) through your office to the following questions.
In doing so, please also refer to the letter from RSG to you dated April 21st, 2021 and May 6th, 2021, as well as the letter from BZK to you dated May 12th, 2021.
As you prepare the answers to the questions, I would like to remind you that PJIA ultimately belongs to the people of Sint Maarten, who are represented by this Parliament and to which the Government is accountable.
As such, the Government should make any information regarding PJIA, and certainly the information related to the reconstruction and financing agreements, available to Parliament upon request, unless Government can provide a documented legal basis for not doing so.

1. Did RSG offer to provide assistance and/or solutions with regards to the reconstruction of PJIA to either the Government of Sint Maarten or PJIA in the days and weeks after the devastation caused by Hurricane Irma, when the local government and staff were trying to salvage what was left of PJIA and preparing to rebuild with the limited means and infrastructure available?
2. If so, what did that assistance and/or those solutions by RSG consist of?
3. Did BZK offer to provide assistance and/or solutions with regards to the reconstruction of PJIA to either the Government of Sint Maarten or PJIA in the days and weeks after the devastation caused by Hurricane Irma, when the local government and staff were trying to salvage what was left of PJIA and preparing to rebuild with the limited means and infrastructure available?
4. If so, what did that assistance and/or those solutions by BZK consist of?
5. Whose initiative was it to have RSG involved in the reconstruction and financing agreements for PJIA, when was this first proposed, and was the proposed role of RSG?
6. Whose initiative was it to have BZK involved in the reconstruction and financing agreements for PJIA, when was this first proposed, and was the proposed role of BZK?
7. Which entities are signatories to the reconstruction and financing agreements, and on which date(s) were these agreements signed?
8. How many parties in total are directly involved in the reconstruction and financing agreements in terms of having to agree to/sign agreements for the agreements to become a reality?
9. What are the exact objectives/goals of the reconstruction and financing agreements?
10. Have these goals/objectives been achieved? If not, can you indicate which signatories contributed to this, and what the contractual consequences for these signatories are/should be?
11. Previous to the signing of the reconstruction and financing agreements, had other alternatives been considered by either the Government or PJIA?
12. If so, was an evaluation/comparison of all options carried out and if so, by whom, which criteria were used other than the interest rate, and what was the outcome of this evaluation/comparison?
13. Is the Government currently willing to consider alternative financing sources for executing the reconstruction of PJIA based on an evaluation/comparison using additional criteria to the interest rate?
14. What are responsibilities, tasks, and deliverables of each of the signatories to the reconstruction and financing agreements? Have all responsibilities, tasks, and deliverables been lived up to by all signatories, and if not, why not?
15. Have progress reports been made related to the progress of the reconstruction and financing agreements?
16. If so, can Parliament receive copies of these reports?
17. If not, which signatory/signatories did not provide said reports and why not?
18. Have all current members of the Supervisory Board of Directors of PJIAE been screened and found to have a clean (past) record in terms of their professional and private conduct?
19. Who appointed the current members of the Supervisory Board of Directors of PJIAE, when did this take place, and were these appointments done in full compliance with the articles of incorporation of PJIAE, PJIAH, and the applicable rules and regulations related to good corporate governance?
20. Have these articles of incorporation and/or rules and regulations related to good (corporate) governance been altered since the current members of the Supervisory Board of Directors of PJIAE were appointed?
21. Is it true that the current CFO of PJIA, who was appointed upon the nomination of RSG and as such represents RSG, has passed the legally established retirement age? If so, what is the reason that he is still employed as CFO, and is his employment in accordance with good (corporate) governance?
22. Has his performance been evaluated, and if not, why not? If so, what was the outcome of said evaluation?
23. Has any of the current bondholders expressed formal or informal concerns to the Government and/or PJIAE and/or PJIAH related to the “concerns” as expressed by BZK and SGR in the latter’s respective letters? If so, can Parliament receive copies of these documents from the bondholders?
24. Has the EIB expressed formal or informal concerns to the Government and/or PJIAE and/or PJIAH related to the “concerns” as expressed by BZK and RSG in their respective letters? If so, can Parliament receive copies of these documents from the EIB?
25. Has the Government done a legal review on the allegations leveled by BZK and RSG in their respective letters? If not, why not? If so, what is the status, by whom was/is this review (being) carried out, and what were the conclusions, if any?
26. What is the opinion of the Government on the outcome of the summary proceedings of the (former) CEO of PJIA against PJIAH and the considerations provided by the respective legal counsels and the judge in the case?
27. Has the Government had any formal or informal communications with BZK and/or RGS prior to or after RSG issued its letters to you on April 26th, 2021, and May 6th, 2021?
28. Does the Government consider it good (corporate) governance by RSG to formally and directly address ahead of Government related to an agreement that it is signatory to, instead of/without first addressing its co-signatories to said agreement? If not, has the Government informed RSG accordingly?
29. Is it customary that paid consultants like RSG directly or indirectly have so much influence on the management of the airport who employs them and the Government of the country?
30. What is the position of the Government on the extension of the cooperation agreement with RSG, and what it the status of the negotiations? Does the Government have a cost/benefit analysis for the continuation and discontinuation of the cooperation agreement as is?
31. According to Government, are the recent actions and statements of BZK and SGR in accordance with good governance?
32. Is Government of the opinion that BZK and SGR are abusing their power towards Sint Maarten?
33. If not, who would Government qualify their recent actions and statements related to PJIA? If so, how and when does the Government intend to deal with this abuse of power, and which role, if any, does Government see for Parliament in this process?

I look forward to receiving the answers to the above questions at your earliest convenience.

Seeing the importance of this matter, and depending on the answers received to the questions above, I will consider seeking an inquiry and/or investigation at Parliamentary level into the reconstruction and financing agreements for PJIA and related matters.

The Government of Sint Maarten has its own authority, responsibilities, and decision-making process. It will have to use its own discretion in deciding if it will bow to this new attempt at extortion and blackmail by the Dutch signatories to the reconstruction and financing agreements.
In doing so, it will also have to decide if selling out the patrimonium of the people of Sint Maarten without anything to show for it is worth it, and explain the people why.
As a duly elected representative of the people, I will continue to follow my conscience and definitely not accept or bow to this latest example of extortion and blackmail.

Faction Leader UP faction and Second Vice-Chair of Parliament

Grisha Martin Heyliger.

Airport Saga From we own. PJIAE saga continues.

Dear Media,

Would like to address you with some factual information regarding the recent political developments. It would seem as if everyone is washing their hands of the Mingo saga and now attempting to throw the honorable Minister of Teatt under the bus. The same Minister has been thrown under the bus for doing the right thing numerous of times by her own leader and faction leader of the UP party. As with the Casino licenses, the 721 illegal businesses, and other business and operating licenses that they want her to push through, her integrity wouldn’t allow and they wanted her gone.

Fact is:

• Brian Mingo’s lawyer mentioned the puppet masters at UP who wanted him gone for not proceeding with the FBO and Pre-clearance. The issue here is the awarding of the contracts the same reason the UP got rid of Marcel Gumbs.

• The UP party wanted Mingo gone and used the momentum of the opposition to get their message across.

• The Doncher Family is in dire financial straits and desperately needs to stay in the good graces of those in power

• Glen Daniel on the supervisory board of the holding is in business with Theo Heyliger.

• The honorable Minister of TEATT Ludi de Weever warned Mr. Doncher on numerous occasions that if he is taking instructions from MP Brison and Grisha Heyliger that he needs to cover his butt. To make sure he is legally sound and in his right.

• Mr. Doncher based on the instruction of the puppet masters to sabotage all negotiations with the Dutch to seek alternative financing that would cost the island $250 million dollars more but would allow contracts to be given out without proper bidding to the puppet masters.

• For the last few months, there has been a divide within the council of Ministers on doing the right thing and suspending Dexter due to the lack of corporate governance.

• Minister Ludi has warned the party in the past of the dangers of Schiphol pulling out and the cost to the island. The Minister also has her auditing reputation on the line and the stress of wrongdoings by the strings of the puppet masters grew daily.

• A forensic audit needs to be done at the airport


• The candidate Minister of TEATT of the UP Party Mr. Roger Lawrence has been advised by the current Minister of TEATT not to mess up his good reputation by accepting this position.


• The Minister of TEATT only stayed in the best interest of the country and to fight for the homeporting. After the homeporting has been finalized she will take her seat in parliament fully.


• MP Rolando Brison will not be taking up the role as Minister of TEATT as he cannot pass the screening due to an upcoming court case where he owes $30k in owed rent.

Yours truly,

Born Antillean
Keep Sint Maarten Alive


Vinaora Nivo Slider 3.xVinaora Nivo Slider 3.x

RADIO FROM VOICEOFTHECARIBBEAN.NET

Vinaora Nivo Slider 3.x
Vinaora Nivo Slider 3.x
Vinaora Nivo Slider 3.x
Vinaora Nivo Slider 3.x