Dear Editor,

  I am asking for permission to air out some grievances with regard to a situation existing for some time.

  Now that the Integrity Chamber is becoming reality, those with skeletons in their closet are running around helter-skelter, trying to cover their tracks. This present government seems to be dragging its feet on that issue.

  The watchdogs of society need to pay close attention to the actions of some persons recently appointed to prominent positions at government departments and some family members.

  Poor families are being denied the opportunity to lift themselves out of poverty, through the actions of some corrupt civil servants and greedy businessmen. Certain people could own several properties all over town and the one tiny piece which has been inhabited by four and five generations of the same family is now being taken away. It is an open and low-lying area which gets flooded with the passage of every storm or hurricane. This was made worse with the added run-off water coming from a three-story building erected next door.

  Imagine what would happen if another building is allowed to be built there. It would be like a huge concrete barrier, stopping the flow of water which gushes into our yard like waves on the seashore. That is what we experienced during Hurricanes Luis, Lenny, Irma and Maria, just to name a few. The water would rise quite rapidly, putting our families’ lives at risk of death or serious injury.

  We were granted an audience with the former Minister of VROMI, and I will refer to him here as the Hon. Christophe Emmanuel, who I have now come to realize was the only one with a sympathetic ear. He is a true “man of the people” and I hope he gets back into office soon to continue the good he has been doing.

  Now here comes a minister, who was a member of staff at that same department where several protest letters were filed, approving the building permit as soon as he gets into office. I would consider that a conflict of interest. Is it possible to have one building permit application for two separate areas, one uptown and one downtown? And all the games being played with a request to review the building permit application, by scheduling meetings an hour or two before or on holidays.

  That is impossible for someone who is busy and a government department which closes on every holiday.

  I am pleading with the powers that be and the present Min. of VROMI, to take a serious look into the situation. There are funds made available to help the people.

  Why not re-purchase the property, which is valued at just over US $100,000, or offer the businessman a concession in the planned development along Walter Nisbeth Rd. in exchange for said property, which could then be split between the two neighbouring families along existing boundary lines. By doing so, you would be adding value to what is already theirs, which they can now use as collateral to seek financing, to not just rebuild but upgrade to a higher standard for them and future generations.

  Where is the help for these families, who had a complete building wiped out and others damaged? A little over $50,000 each for two neighbouring families. Is that too much to ask? A win-win situation for everyone involved.

  Even if the area were to be developed, it would have to be two separate buildings, with space in between them, so that in the event of any storm, the water would make its way out easily. Not one huge structure taking up the whole area. And there is no proper drainage in the area to help facilitate the flow of water. That building, if allowed to be built, would be denying residents proper access to their homes which they have lived in for generations.

  We will present an official request to the authorities, because what this situation boils down to, simply put, is a matter of ultimate survival.

Blessed love,

J. Stakelboroug

Dear Editor,

  Normally when I put fingers to keyboard to write something like this it is easy for me. The issue is usually so clear and undeniably obvious that the words flow almost as if by magic. The dump burns for years and everybody says it’s impossible to stop. Then, one day, a judge says, “Stop it or I’ll fine you a zillion dollars a day.” Suddenly, overnight , the impossible problem is solved and the dump doesn’t burn anymore. One can only ask why that solution wasn’t so obvious for the last two years. Obvious question. Obvious letter to the editor pointing out the manifest incompetence and abject stupidity of those in charge. It writes itself.

  Not so this time. This is so serious that it makes my stomach hurt to even talk about it and the situation so manifestly evil that it defies imagination that any civilized government can allow it to happen. Yet here we are.

  Acknowledging beforehand that I have no access to anything factual concerning the case, this newspaper reports that a certain boat has been seized by the relevant Asset Seizure Team relevant to a certain ongoing criminal investigation. On the face of it, it would be hard to say there is anything wrong with the concept of grabbing the assets of those individuals that have been convicted of a crime and have derived those assets through ill-gotten gains. But that’s not what is apparently happening.

  The notion of innocent until proven guilty or the notion of due process is out the window. Is the accused guilty of anything? Who knows? There has been no trial and no conviction nor course of appeals that I am aware of. Just a host of accusations.

  Beyond that, now comes a second individual with what he claims is irrefutable evidence that the asset in question is not even the property of the accused. Well, that must be easy to resolve, you might think. All that needs to happen is that there is a court hearing and expert witnesses are called to forensically examine and then testify as to the veracity of the affidavits and the provenance of the documents.

  But wait. There is no such court case. There is, apparently, a SECRET hearing during which no defense can be offered. A single judge, IN SECRET hears the case put forth by the prosecution and says, “He’s guilty because I say so,” and no written verdict is issued.

  For those of you too young to remember, there was another country like that some years ago. It was called Nazi Germany. It was there that legitimate government and the rule of law were simply abandoned and the notion of an honest and transparent law enforcement and judiciary gave way to one of simple thievery, thuggery and deception. If the government wanted your assets, they just took them and had no explanations or justifications to make to anyone. The trials were secret and were usually held after the fact and were a foregone conclusion because there were few brave enough or even alive to protest.

  What is happening here now, IF it is happening as reported, is both remarkably similar and a travesty of human rights by any imaginable standard.

  I wrote this all before once in this space when this whole asset seizure thing was put forth. I made the case then that due process where the accused has the God-given right to face his accuser in a public court where a legitimate and compelling case must be made BEFORE any seizure takes place is the basic prerequisite of ANY citizen of a civilized society. I say that again and I stand by that statement and I am appalled that the legal community here has not arisen en mass to haul government before the World Court of Human Rights and set this right.

  That’s what happened in Nazi Germany as well. The only people that could do something were too cowardly to act. You would have thought that that particular history lesson would have been well learned by now. Wrong again.

 The irony here is that I am a hard-core, right-wing, law-and-order Republican, yet here I am writing like some left-wing, liberal, California Democrat.

  The thing is that fundamental Right and Wrong are concepts that need to transcend political expedience. This Asset Seizure scheme, the way it is organized now, is so comprehensively wrong that I am staggered that individuals in the Prosecutor’s Office that have genuine degrees in the Law and are smart and competent professionals would allow themselves to be shamed by allowing this system to exist in its current guise.

  If this guy is guilty as you say, and if he has these assets derived from criminal activities, then go to court in public, let the cases be heard and all the witnesses be presented and meet some genuine and objective standard of proof. That’s your job.

  You don’t do it alone in front of a friendly judge that you have in your pocket. You also don’t just grab someone’s property and then say, “Better hurry up and prove something before we sell it off to fund some politicians’ cell phones and junkets.”

  I implore you. Fix this now. Be honest and be fair. That’s all anyone asks and all anyone deserves. Be as tough as you want, but do it in public with the complete due process that a civilized society demands. Because the way it is right now, you are no better and possibly worse than the criminals that you purport to protect us from. All you are missing are the black hoods and jackboots.

Steven Johnson

Dear Editor,

  Nature Foundation Sint Maarten is again urging Parliament to ban single-use plastics, such as plastic bags, straws, cups and cutlery, and Styrofoam food containers. Recently many neighbouring Caribbean islands have already banned or announced to ban single-use plastics in order to protect the environment and decrease plastic pollution.

  Single-use plastic pollution is one of the biggest environmental catastrophes of this generation and these plastics are abundantly littered on St Maarten. Single-use plastics are also a major contributor to the current situation at the Philipsburg landfill.

  On St Maarten we see massive amounts of single-use plastics in our natural areas, including the ocean and Simpson Bay Lagoon, along roadsides and on our beaches every single day. The day after we conduct a beach clean-up, beaches are flooded with our trash and plastics all over again. We keep on cleaning our beaches and nature areas; however, it is an endless fight as people keep on littering and leaving single-use plastics behind.

  Several nations who banned single-use plastics are seeing significantly cleaner neighbourhoods and environments, creating a healthier and more attractive nation. St. Maarten needs a ban on single-use plastics, we do not have any more time and we cannot afford to wait until tourists stop visiting our island due to the disturbing waste and littering situation.

  Three Caribbean countries – Dominica, Jamaica and Turks and Caicos – started the New Year environmentally and banned single-use plastics since the 1^st of January. Several Caribbean nations were ahead of these islands and already implemented bans on single-use plastics in the past couple of years.

  Since 2012 Haiti issued a ban on the importation, manufacture or sale of plastic bags and disposable foam products, in an attempt to address the massive litter problem and protecting the coastline, shore and remaining mangrove forests. St. Vincent and the Grenadines already banned the import of Styrofoam since May 2017, as Styrofoam is made of fossil fuels and synthetic chemicals, which may leach if they come in contact with hot, greasy or acidic food, adding an unwanted dose of toxins to your drink or food.

  Aruba followed and banned single-use plastic bags since 2017 and will extend its ban to a total ban on all single-use plastics in 2020. Grenada had begun with a ban on the import of Styrofoam in 2018, in February this year they will ban all single-use plastics such as shopping bags, cutlery, plates, straws and cups. Already in 2016, Antigua and Barbuda started its ban of single use plastic grocery bags and recently their Prime Minister called on all nations to join them in banning the use of single-use plastics.

  But so far St Maarten stays behind, as no concrete steps are taken yet to ban single-use plastics from our island and safeguard our nature, environment marine life, wildlife and protect our own health against these destructive plastics.

  The Bahamas will ban single-use plastics, such as shopping bags, food utensils, straws and Styrofoam food containers in 2020. The Bahamas also want to make the release of balloons into the air illegal, as they end up in our oceans, releasing toxins and injuring marine life. Likewise, Belize pledged to ban single-use plastic items by April this year, which has been welcomed by residents as Belizean shores are at risk from the enormous floating island of plastic in the Caribbean Sea and plastic harms marine and wildlife.

  Also Anguilla started the process to ban single-use plastic items; the prohibition will include single-use plastic shopping bags, utensils, and polystyrene foam containers. Furthermore, Barbados declares a complete ban on the importation, retail, sale and use of petro-based single use plastic products within effect of 2020.

  Not to speak about countries outside the Caribbean which already banned single-use plastics, such as Rwanda, a pioneer in banning single-use plastic bags, is now one of the cleanest nations on earth.

  Even the European Commission is in the process of banning single-use plastic products and putting the burden of cleaning up waste on manufacturers in an effort to reduce marine litter. Governments in more than 60 countries have introduced levies and bans to combat single-use plastic waste, according to U.N. Environment; it is time for St Maarten, which struggles with poor waste management and large amounts of littering, to do the same.

  At least 9 million tons of plastic enters the world’s oceans each year, a rate that has increased 100 times in the past 40 years, and 96 per cent of all marine biodiversity is vulnerable to this plastic pollution. Half of all sea turtles mistake plastic for food and 90 per cent of all sea birds ingest plastic. If current trends continue, a lot of marine life will die and there will be more plastic than fish in the ocean by 2050.

  Single use plastic bags, plastic straws, plastic cups, balloons, cutlery and Styrofoam food containers are some of the most environmentally damaging products on our island. These items do not biodegrade and stay in the ecosystem and oceans forever. They release a variety of chemicals during degradation, which have a negative impact on organisms, us and our ecosystems. New research even shows that plastic breakdown accelerates greenhouse gas production in the environment.

Nature Foundation St. Maarten

Dear Editor,

  Really and truly? Opposition, why another no-confidence motion against another minister again?

  Why? So, they put you all? St. Maarten opposition sit about 98 per cent on the opposition benches since they exist.

  We just had falling of many governments, both parliamentarians and ministers made wonders with articles 33 and 59.

  And we just had a very bad hurricane in (2017).

  We are making progress bringing the Island of St. Maarten back on track. With great confidence St. Maarten has its first stable government since 10/10/10, We rather you all work together than hearing about a motion of no confidence. We the people would rather have the opposition bring motions on the table such as:

* increase  the minimum wage .

* adjust house rent on the Island; rents too high.

* price control.

* increase pension.

* more roads needed.

* eliminate the six-month contracts.

* let buses run on the east side of the Island.

* let GEBE bring the water meters nearer to the homes; the meters are too far.

* district representatives.

* more public toilets are needed 24/7

  These are the motions the entire public are expecting from the opposition to focus on for a brighter future for poor men.

Cuthbert Bannis