Dear Editor,
Let’s line up the following facts:
Firstly, the failure of many developing countries, particularly small ones, has been caused by the breakdown of effective democracy that has been undermined by various forms of non-democratic behavior including vote buying and undue vote influencing.
Secondly, the recent demonstration was based on the accusation that the Prosecutor’s Office in St. Maarten is “selective” in its choice of cases to prosecute. The case in the forefront concerned vote buying.
Surely we should hope that the Prosecutor’s Office should prioritize cases whose behavior has the widest possible impact on the future of the country? Would vote buying which potentially undermines the very essential nature of our democratic future therefore not be the correct prioritized choice for a prosecutor’s office? Should we not applaud this selection rather than condemn it?
The person concerned in this indictment is Theo Heyliger. I personally consider him one of the highest potential politicians in St. Maarten with an acute understanding of the political options and a great track record in certain areas. I dearly hope he can prove his innocence.
Our views on the person of Theo, however, should not be confused with the judicial process!
Robbie Ferron
