Dear editor,
In this Kingdom of the Low Lands marching for “No Kings” is not a realistic option. Yet there are times we do need to wonder how protective is our sovereign over his people. We know constitutionally the position of the monarch is very much hollowed out compared to earlier times but if he wants to, he can still cause his majesty’s government a bellyache. Especially, we know his granny Queen Juliana was not shy to let a stubborn government smell one from time to time.
Despite his diminished constitutional role, the monarch appears in many places in many ways in our daily lives, mostly in ways that are not a bother to anyone like on our currency (I think) or in state portraits hung in diverse places, lest we forget. His name also adorns the proclamation of new laws and royal decrees handed down to his subjects.
Anyone who has had dealings with, for example, our national tax department and in some cases other departments you may owe something, and may have received a summons from a marshal will know that those documents often come with a heading that says “In the name of the King.” The subject, of course, is about monies you supposedly (still) owe and now you are summoned to pay up within short or face serious consequences such as seizures, liens or even public auction of your properties.
Thing is, sometimes it is eventually proven that the client doesn’t owe anything at all, or the bill was already paid or partially paid, and oftentimes due to backlogs in the administration of the demanding entity itself. Then they have to apologize for wrongfully accosting you and for some persons this can be a traumatic experience. But we never get a written apology “In the name of the King” in recognition of their error.
This makes me wonder, does the king really know all that is being done in his name throughout his colonial domain? Does he know there are civil servants going about their business every day knocking on poor people’s doors with heavy stacks of paperwork in fact professing to have been sent directly by his majesty? Only to find out that untruths are being peddled in his name? What would be his reaction if he knew? What consequences would befall his royal administrators? And, most importantly, what changes would ensue?
Few weeks ago island council members in Statia received a royal decree, on royal letterhead, and signed by his majesty himself letting us know that our decision in a meeting of our council was under review for potentially being annulled because there is a suspicion the decision was in conflict with the law.
Then a few weeks later civil servants from two different royal ministries convened a virtual meeting with us council members to supposedly explain to us why the annulment process was taking place and to clarify the further process.
The main point of dispute is whether or not our sole secondary school, the Gwendolyn van Putten school, is a public school or a so-called private school (in Dutch: “bijzondere school”). This is the main point of contention, yet when we asked the ministries reps what their justification is for concluding our school is a private school, they all basically fell silent. They had no answer to give us. The one question that any sane person would expect to be asked in such a meeting about that particular subject could not be answered by the assembled experts representing the kingdom government of which his majesty the king is the head.
At that point our virtual guests decided there was nothing else to discuss and requested the meeting be ended. We are awaiting the final verdict on the extended annulment process and undoubtedly it will arrive on the royal letterhead and signed by his majesty himself. And even that may not be the end of the story. In the name of the king!!
Glenn Schmidt
Island Council member
Statia
