Dear Editor,
As indicated in my article on Friday, June 27, 2025, the population was deprived of the understanding of how the amendments to the budget would have impacted the Justice Ministry and Parliament. Due to the near-sightedness of this low-informed group of parliamentarians (the worst ever), the real issues were unaddressed, intentionally. So, I will elaborate my thoughts, for further clarification.
On several occasions, the public was informed by Justice Minister Nathalie Tackling that the construction of a new prison is on the horizon. As I recalled, not much details were disseminated to get a vivid picture of the operation of the establishment. I have never visited the House of Detention and so I have no clue of what the interior looks like nor how it is being operated.
I had expected the Members of Parliament to present questions that would have enlightened the public on the workings of the prison – a comprehensive overview, that supports the minister’s vision, rather than to have wasted precious time to impose their personal and selfish cravings. Since that expectation did not take place, I am compelled to pose these inquiries for myself and like-minded persons, who deserve more explanations.
Besides the desire to expand and have a more modern facility, what programs would be implemented to supplement the existing ones? I would have liked to hear about the educational program in its entirety and how (very specific) does this program help the inmates.
If confiscating cell phones is a challenge, has management considered having a switchboard to detect, blocked and seized these illegal phones when they are being used in the facility? What penalties would the guards, other personnel, prisoners and their outside contacts faced, when these infractions are committed?
At the same time, what are the root causes for various contrabands to enter the prison and what can be done to reduce this illegal activity? Is it the lack of integrity, the principal reason or does bribery become a factor to supplement a guard’s meager salary? Or, is there a possibility that they are being threatened by inmates and their associates, on the outside? However, these partial inquests do not reflect the broader picture.
How about the sudden disruption of the home, especially when very young children are involved/affected? What demands do they place on their dads to keep that close connection with them on a daily basis? The spouses, family members and friends haven’t even come into play as yet. What pressures do they exert, just to keep in contact with their love ones, who are being incarcerated?
Apart from their freedom being seriously restricted, these situations could be reasons for their rebellion, although the inmates are the ones who made the choice to commit the crimes that caused them to be behind bars. But if rehabilitation is the goal (which is compulsory), then there must be a comprehensive approach to identify and tackle the root causes of these destructive behaviours.
If the focus of the justice ministry is on reintegration, would the prison consist of a state-of-the-art kitchen, so that the inmates could learn professional catering, which includes baking and bartending? Because, if tourism is our number one industry, why not use the opportunity to prepare them, so that when they are released, they can fit easily into the hospitality field, either as an employee or an employer?
Sewing (clothes) is an occupation that is pushed a lot, even though we don’t see the results. But what about upholstery, repairs (an industry that is not being tapped into, locally) – watches, shoes, radios, computers, electronic devises? How about carpentry, mechanic, electrician, tiling, landscaping, and gardening? The prison could be an incubator for several skilled jobs that do not require a degree.
It is high time that government invest in its own. This will cut down on the influx of persons who are just coming in to make money and then leave, which is a constant reoccurrence of a cycle that does not benefit the development of a country that is striving to be self-sufficient.
Consequently, would there be a well-designated family-orientation area where spouses and their children could assembly and engage in various activities as a family, in a private setting? How about another section where other families can mingle and network to share their challenges?
Again, if the restoration of the mind is the cornerstone to help the inmates become better citizens, would there be an overhaul of the mentoring program, to extend beyond the prison? Because, if that support system is lacking, then the cycle of delinquency will start all over again, only this time it will escalate with greater intensity.
Joslyn Morton
Dear Editor,
A quick question. On several occasions people who I am acquainted with have told me that they blow me and I reacted as if I didn't know them. So my question to you is: If that person is (those persons are) driving a car with completely dark tinted glasses, how should I recognize them?
Russell A Simmons
Speech of James Finies for UN Roundtable: “Unity in Action: Accelerating SDG Implementation and Building a Better Future for All”.
I stand before you today not just as an advocate of civil society, but as a voice for those who have always been left behind.
Dear Editor,
Many many years ago my father at one time told me that when those who justifiably have something to say remain silent, it only projects power, not justice. So as long as you don’t shout you do not need the courage not to bow.
I am not sure if what I am writing coincides with the ombudsman’s report, but I am sure that several of the points and/or topics that the Ombudsman highlighted have been written to you either by me or someone else in the past. So my question is “what should one expect with 12 cabinets in 14 years?” The word “irresponsible” comes to mind. And I will take it a step further and ask, whose fault is it?
At one time when I worked on Aruba there was a lieutenant governor who was not pleased about the fact that people would complain about some policemen saying “nos ta manda” (we run things). Which as it was at that time “the truth”. We literally maintained law and order on the island. We did not make the laws, but we made sure that they were upheld. Gradually politicians, I must add, who did not (and still do not) know how to handle luxury of governing, started to contribute to the demise of the friendliness of the island. But I will again have to repeat myself. What should we expect when we permit persons, of which no minimum education is required, to run a country?
There is a saying in Dutch: “van een kikker kun je geen veren plukken.” So I am not surprised when I see a headline like “Ombudsman’s report exposes deepening governance failures.” Would it be mischievous of me if I declare that “at all cost” was the motivation behind the forming this government?
Russell A. Simmons
Dear Editor,
Recent revelations in the press concerning vessels flying the Sint Maarten flag with falsified documentation have attracted the attention of Dutch Members of Parliament and have elicited grave concerns across the Kingdom of the Netherlands. It is reported that a minimum of 77 vessels have obtained counterfeit registration certificates in the name of Sint Maarten, including ships subject to international sanctions.
As a graduate in Port Management and Maritime Affairs from the World Maritime University in Malmö, Sweden, I consider it essential to address this matter not only as a legal and political priority but also from the perspective of international maritime law and globally recognized best practices.
Fake flagging risks
The illicit utilization of a flag, especially one associated with a constituent nation of a sovereign Kingdom, presents significant risks. These encompass potential infringements of United Nations Security Council sanctions as well as more extensive maritime criminal activities, including money-laundering, illegal fishing, and smuggling.
The damage inflicted upon Sint Maarten is both reputational and economic in nature. Our maritime identity is now associated, in international circles, with issues of non-compliance and potential complicity. This association undermines the credibility of Sint Maarten’s maritime institution, which may subsequently lose legitimacy and invite further instances of non-compliance. For the Kingdom of the Netherlands, which bears international responsibilities under UNCLOS and IMO conventions, the issue of fictitious flagging compromises flag-state control and could result in diplomatic or legal consequences. Such implications further tarnish the reputation of the kingdom’s flag state and may lead to sanctions from entities such as the IMO or port-state control regimes.
An additional complication arises from the fact that the Kingdom Act formally consolidates authority over vessel registration within the Netherlands. As a result, Sint Maarten is devoid of the legal capacity to operate an independent, internationally recognized maritime registry. Consequently, all vessels seeking recognition under Kingdom jurisdiction must be registered through systems administered by the Netherlands.
This prevents Sint Maarten from issuing internationally recognized ship registration certificates, establishing a national flag registry with IMO-recognized authority, and exercising direct flag-state control over seagoing vessels.
Own maritime registry authority
The issue also underscores a longstanding structural deficiency. Despite our maritime heritage, Sint Maarten lacks an internationally recognized authority to register seagoing vessels, primarily owing to restrictions imposed by the Kingdom Charter and existing Dutch legislation. Nonetheless, should Sint Maarten establish a properly regulated ship registry, the benefits for the island would be substantial. As demonstrated by Panama, Liberia, the Marshall Islands, even landlocked Mongolia, and San Marino, revenue generated from vessel registration can be considerable. Sint Maarten could enforce standards set by the IMO and ILO, thereby enhancing safety, labor conditions, and environmental compliance – not only for its vessels but also contributing to the disruption of illicit registry activities. A credible registry would bolster local governance, augment legal capacity, and elevate credibility across the Kingdom. Furthermore, it would attract maritime services, crewing agencies, certification organizations, and insurers, thereby fostering the growth of a Blue Economy hub.
Nonetheless, examples from across the globe demonstrate how small nations and territories have effectively established credible and autonomous registries.
* Norway’s International Ship Register (NIS) has enabled the nation to maintain its competitiveness on the global stage while upholding rigorous standards.
* Hong Kong, now one of the world’s largest registries, established its autonomous system while still under British sovereignty in the 1990s.
* Tuvalu and San Marino, despite their limited size, manage registries via strategic alliances and have swiftly adapted to international standards.
These cases demonstrate that a small country or territory can establish a reputable and profitable registry, provided that international standards are adhered to and adequate oversight is maintained.
Legal path forward
To address the current issue and prevent future misconduct, Sint Maarten should undertake the necessary legal groundwork to establish an internationally recognized Maritime Authority, which will be responsible for registering vessels and enforcing flag-state obligations.
This would involve two parallel legal tracks:
* Kingdom-Level Reform – The amendment to the Kingdom Act on Ship Registration (Staatsregeling or other constitutional frameworks), effective from July 1, 2025, establishes a centralized legal framework for the registration of seagoing vessels within the Kingdom of the Netherlands.
While the Act simplifies the process of ship registration and delineates vessel nationality under a unified jurisdiction, it also entails significant legal and economic constraints for Sint Maarten, a constituent country within the Kingdom. This necessitates cooperation from the Kingdom Council of Ministers and legislative approval in accordance with the Charter for the Kingdom of the Netherlands (Articles 38 and 43).
Or – Formulate a Memorandum of Understanding between the Netherlands and Sint Maarten to delegate registry powers, outlining oversight, dispute resolution, international representation, and ensuring adherence to international law. Furthermore, secure Sint Maarten’s separate accession or participation in UNCLOS 1982, IMO conventions, and the 1986 Conditions for Registration of Ships, establishing a “genuine link.”
* Local legal infrastructure – Establish a Maritime Authority of Sint Maarten by national ordinance in accordance with the national reform at the kingdom level. – Enact a Ship Registration Act aligned with SOLAS, MARPOL, STCW, and the Maritime Labour Convention (MLC 2006). – Develop institutional capacity to issue ship certificates, perform inspections, and de-register non-compliant vessels.
Such reforms would necessitate foresight and collaboration with maritime experts; however, they are completely achievable and significantly overdue.
Cost of inaction
In the absence of definitive measures to resolve this issue, Sint Maarten risks being blacklisted within international maritime communities. If the nation is perceived as a refuge for convenience flagging or vessels evading international oversight, there is a potential threat of losing legitimate maritime commerce and becoming subject to sanctions or inspections.
More importantly, we overlook a significant opportunity to cultivate a strategic maritime sector that has the potential to generate revenue, create employment opportunities, and enhance Sint Maarten’s visibility within the Caribbean region and internationally.
Scandal to strategy
The recent exposure of fraudulent ship registration serves as a wake-up call and highlights the ease with which reputations can be compromised. Instead of responding defensively, Sint Maarten ought to utilize this opportunity to reaffirm its stance as a reputable maritime entity within the Kingdom and on the global stage.
While the Kingdom Act on Ship Registration safeguards the unity and reputation of the Kingdom of the Netherlands in maritime affairs, it concurrently impedes Sint Maarten’s ambitions for maritime autonomy and economic advancement within the sector. In the absence of legal acknowledgment or authority to register vessels, Sint Maarten remains susceptible to the misuse of its national symbols and is deprived of legitimate maritime economic opportunities.
To safeguard its identity and unlock potential in the blue economy, Sint Maarten must advocate for a measured legal pathway to establish a recognized registry, supported by legislative reforms across the Kingdom and robust local governance.
With the appropriate legal framework, strategic partnerships, and a steadfast commitment to international compliance, Sint Maarten is positioned to establish a reputable and sustainable ship registry. The moment has arrived to transition from scandal to strategic development, doing so with ambition, professionalism, and determination.
Romain Laville
Port Management, Maritime Affairs Graduate
World Maritime University, Malmö, Sweden
