Dear Editor,
Doing the right thing is one thing, but to back it with the rightful argument is another thing.
In our western democracy, the prevention of totalitarianism and the reign of justice, equality, integrity, are guaranteed upon the fundamental principle of the separation of powers.
Parliamentary or presidential regime, we find the same three separated and independent powers:
* The legislative whose power is to elaborate laws.
* The executive whose power is to govern, composed of the government and its different administrations.
* The Judiciary whose function is to judge.
My point is, if there is evidence of a lack of integrity in any one of these three powers, can it be corrected and prevented by making the same guilty power bigger, by establishing a new corruption in Sint Maarten? Why should they choose to make the same accused powers bigger?
I know that they are more clever than that!
Why not turn toward the Judiciary power composed of professional judges to do the job?
Why create a controversial executive institution, an integrity chamber without precedent and composed of members chosen within the same accused corrupted politicians?
Since the only constitutional court within the kingdom is that of St. Maarten, the more rational option should not have been to extend the role of that court?
Why not a joint constitutional and administrative court?
Well the answer to those question is totalitarianism,
Creating an executive institution with judiciary powers is the means for the Dutch Prime Minister and his State Secretary of Home Affairs and Kingdom Relations to concentrate in their hands all three powers, the legislative, the executive and the judiciary, ruling by arbitrary instructions when not blackmail.
Leopold Baly