NA MP Ardwell Irion.
~Says nomination politicised~
PHILIPSBURG--National Alliance (NA) Member of Parliament (MP) Ardwell Irion has rejected claims by attorney Jairo Bloem that the controversy surrounding his conditional nomination to the Supervisory Board of Directors (SBOD) of the Central Bank of Curaçao and St. Maarten (CBCS) is politically driven. Irion insists the matter is not about politics, but about legality, accountability, and the integrity of institutions.
“I do not believe this matter is being politicized by Parliament. Both coalition and opposition members have raised concerns, as well as the Central Bank Supervisory Board itself,” Irion stated in response to questions from this newspaper about Bloem's claims that the matter is being politicised. “This shows it is not about politics, but about ensuring proper governance and respect for the law. When Parliament questions or challenges actions that are not consistent with the legal framework, that is not politics—it is us doing our job.”
Irion was clear about where he believes political interference is coming from. “I do believe that Bloem’s current process of appointment is all political by this current administration, and that’s why they don’t want to follow procedure.”
Irion was asked by this newspaper to comment in the wake of public statements by Bloem, who has suggested the pushback to his nomination is “a pure political ploy” meant to cause instability. Irion pushed back on that assertion, stating that the concerns are broad-based and rooted in clear legal procedures.
He said the process laid out in the Central Bank Charter must be followed without deviation. “Recommendations are made by the Supervisory Board, nominations by the Ministers, and appointments by Kingdom decree. That three-step process cannot be bypassed or reshaped by individual interpretation.”
Irion also questioned Bloem’s reference to past internal government correspondence. “Mr. Bloem has cited letters from 2011. To my knowledge, these were internal communications between Finance Ministers at the time,” he said. “If such letters are being used as precedent today, it is important to clarify how they were obtained, whether they remain relevant under the current Charter provisions, and whether they carry the same legal weight as the law itself.”
Addressing Bloem’s remarks about his own tenure as Minister of Finance, during which no appointments to the SBOD were finalised, Irion clarified that the process had indeed been initiated, but ultimately stalled. “The board sent a nomination which was Etienne Ys. It was rejected by Curaçao. Subsequently, we would have been at a stalemate, and I understood the Minister of Finance of Curaçao’s reasons. The board continued the process for another member,” he explained. “We didn’t set up a recruitment process like the Minister is doing now.”
Irion further pointed out contradictions between Bloem’s version of events and that of the current Finance Minister. “Which one is it? Please refer back to the Question Hour, and I would like, for sure, as one of my statements, that the Minister’s response and that of Bloem contradict each other.”
He also raised serious questions about the legal opinion cited by the government in support of the nomination. “When was all the ‘legal’ [work] done? Before or after the COM’s [Council of Ministers] approval?" He said the advice from Brooks and Associates was only sought after the
fact. “So the legal advice was just to appease the client, nothing else. It definitely wasn’t objective, being the president of the board of the URSM [Unified Resilient St Maarten Movement] party that is part of the coalition.”
Irion questioned why legal advice was not instead sought from government’s own legal affairs department or its long-standing external counsel. “Why not seek advice from our legal affairs department? Or our external lawyer Richard Gibson Jr.?”
He underscored what he sees as the real issue: the need to protect institutional independence through lawful conduct. “The Central Bank is one of our most critical institutions. Its independence, stability, and credibility are directly tied to how appointments are handled,” he said. “The best way forward is to fully respect the process as laid down in the Charter and the law. This is not about personalities or politics. It is about upholding the law, maintaining institutional integrity, and ensuring that appointments are made in a transparent and lawful manner. That is the responsibility of both government and Parliament.”
