That the Council of State sees space for binding advice on disputes between the Kingdom partners (see related story) can be considered positive. The need for an arrangement to settle those kinds of differences mainly regarding the interpretation of the Kingdom Charter and related
issues like the application of the Governors Regulation have been discussed for quite some time.
There is basic agreement on establishing an independent body for such among the four legislatures concerned, as witnessed at the last several Inter-Parliamentary Kingdom Consultation IPKO sessions. However, the Dutch Government prefers a temporary solution involving the Council of State.
The delegations of St. Maarten, Aruba and Curaçao at the most recent IPKO were not too thrilled about that prospect, prompting the latter country to prepare a draft Kingdom Law whereby the High Court in The Hague would be charged with the matter. Nevertheless, it was decided to give particularly Dutch Home Affairs and Kingdom Relations Minister Ronald Plasterk more space to comply with the expressed wishes of the elected representatives.
One of the objections is that in Plasterk’s proposal the Kingdom Council of Ministers dominated by the Dutch cabinet would still have the last word. Should the Council of State’s advice be binding, that would of course change.
An example mentioned is the “Crown Appeal” that can be applied regarding the Kingdom Law on Financial Supervision and – for Curaçao and St. Maarten – also the so-called Plans of Approach. In those cases the Council prepares its recommendations in a draft decree indicating what parts are binding, which the Kingdom Government cannot just ignore.
The issue is all the more relevant in light of the upcoming IPKO gathering in the Netherlands from May 31 to June 3 that was discussed during a closed-door committee meeting in Philipsburg on Monday. It’s indeed high time for a breakthrough on this topic.
