Open letter to the Cabinet of the Governor of Sint Maarten

Letters to the editor 12 December 2017 Hits: 948

Dear Honorable Governor Holiday,
By means of this letter, I wish to hereby bring this urgent matter to your immediate attention as The Governor of Sint Maarten and The Representative of The Government of the Kingdom of the Netherlands and King Willem-Alexander, charged with the responsibility to ensure good governance and legal certainly as laid down in The Kingdom Charter Article 43.
“1. Each of the countries ensures the realisation of fundamental human rights and freedoms, legal certainty and the soundness of governance.
“2. The guarantee of these rights, freedoms, legal certainty and
soundness of government is the affair of the Kingdom.”
I am hereby exercising my fundamental right to petition the relevant authority. According to the Constitution of Sint Maarten, Article 24 paragraph 1, “Everyone shall have the right to submit petitions in writing to the competent authorities.” Therefore, as a Concerned Citizen of Sint Maarten, I am addressing the violation of the Constitution of Sint Maarten by the Honorable Members of Parliament.
Since Sint Maarten became an autonomous Country within the Kingdom of The Netherlands on 10 October 2010, I have seen where the Government and even more alarmingly the Elected Members of Parliament who are primarily responsible for making the Laws on Sint Maarten have violated the Constitution. The continuous violation and compromising of the laws laid down in the Constitution of Sint Maarten have in the past and will continue to bring Constitutional Crises and Economic Disaster to Sint Maarten in the future if this irresponsible disregard for the Constitution of Sint Maarten is not addressed by someone of your capacity. The Parliament of Sint Maarten should not be passing laws with less than two-thirds majority support of the serving members.
The Constitution of Sint Maarten, Article 61.2 states that “Resolutions are carried by an absolute majority of the votes cast unless this Constitution provides otherwise.”
Article 129 paragraph 2 does provide and state otherwise: “Parliament may not approve a draft national ordinance or resolve to propose it for endorsement without a majority of at least two thirds of the votes cast by the serving members.”
This minimum requirement for passing Draft National Ordinances as demanded by our Constitution, which is two thirds of the votes cast of the serving members, was chosen and established when the Constitution was being crafted. The change from the conventional two thirds of the votes cast (as stated in Article 42.4 of The Kingdom Charter) to the more stringent arrangement of two thirds of the votes cast of the serving members (as stated in Article 129 of the Constitution of Sint Maarten) was an authorised change by the Kingdom Government who along with the Members of the island Council at the time, reviewed, accepted and passed into law the said Draft National Ordinance we now call The Constitution of Sint Maarten.
The facts of this change are also supported by the Explanatory Notes to the Constitution of Sint Maarten Chapter 9 Final Provisions where it states the following: “Article 129: Altering the Constitution: The procedure for the alteration of this Constitution is substantively consistent with Article 42(2) of the Charter for the Kingdom and Article 149 of the Constitution of the Netherlands Antilles.”
A not insignificant difference, however, is the more stringent procedure prescribed for alteration of the Constitution. While the Charter for the Kingdom requires a majority of two thirds of the votes cast, this draft, in accordance with the Constitution of Aruba and the draft Constitution of Curacao, requires a two thirds majority of the serving members. This more stringent procedure reinforces the assurance character of the Constitution.
On the basis of Article 42 of the Charter for the Kingdom the Constitution, assuming 15 members, could already be altered with six votes; (Six (6) is two thirds (2/3) of nine (9), so nine (9) would have been the required minimum in order to convene a meeting in the first instance instead of eight (8) as is now being illegally practiced by our Parliament).
According to this draft (i.e. the Constitution of Sint Maarten), at least 10 votes are required for that purpose. The government of the Kingdom accepted this more stringent procedure for the Constitution of Aruba in 1986 and more recently did so again in its views of the draft Constitution of Curaçao.
Even though Article 42.2 of the Kingdom Charter says “The Constitutions of the Netherlands Antilles and of Aruba are established by ordinance. Any proposal for the amendment of the Constitutions shall explicitly describe the proposed amendment. The representative assemblies shall adopt a Bill for a country ordinance of this kind only by a two-thirds majority of the votes cast,” the more stringent procedure was adopted In the Kingdom Charter Act, “Text of the Staff Regulations for the Kingdom of the Netherlands, as lastly amended by the Rijkswet Amendment of the Staff Regulations in connection with the Abolition of the Dutch Antilles” published on November 23, 2010 9:00, where the Kingdom Government authorized the change and the incorporation of the more strict procedure of two thirds of votes of the serving members as being the minimum requirement for the Parliament of Sint Maarten to alter the Constitution legitimately through Draft National Ordinances.
One of the conditions of the successful rite of passage of the Draft National Ordinance (which we now call our Constitution), was Article 60a of the Kingdom Charter, which says, “1. The designs for a Constitution of Curaçao, respectively of Sint Maarten, drawn up by the Island Councils of Curaçao and Sint Maarten by Island Ordinance, shall be granted at the time of the entry into force of Articles I and II of the Kingdom Act amending the Staff Regulations in connection with the abolition of the Netherlands Antilles the State of Constitution of Curaçao, respectively of Sint Maarten, if: a. the opinion of the government of the Kingdom has been obtained before the design has been presented to the relevant island council, or before an initiative design has been investigated by the relevant island council; b. the design has been accepted by the relevant island council with at least two thirds of the votes cast, and c. the Government of the Kingdom has agreed to the draft established by the relevant Island Council.”
In light of the above it is safe to conclude that all alterations to the Constitution through Draft National Ordinances can only become Law if the National Ordinances are voted on and supported by a minimum of two-thirds (2/3) or ten (10) Members of the fifteen (15) Serving Members.
Kindly request Your Excellency to directly address this matter without delay and I shall await your response in writing.