Dear Editor,
I have watched the video and come to a quite different conclusion: the facts are not true.
In short: after coming up, the Prime Minister goes first and he has to leave last. But he cannot leave if the others are still standing.
Minister Rutte is the first one to lift his head after all the other persons did a silent prayer. At the moment when all 6 persons have lifted their heads, Mr. Ellis starts turning.
Acting Minister Plenipotentiary H. Ellis is the one on the left side (when watching the video) who is the leading person for the moment of walking away from the wreath-laying. This is always a difficult moment, as that person is the first to move and then the rest (the other 5 persons) have to follow. You can compare this with a military parade, but there the commands are shouted by a commander so the end person (and everybody else) knows when to turn. This ceremony has a protocol to follow. We do not have a commander in charge and the person on the left decides the moment of turning and walking away.
In the video you can see that Minister Plenipotentiary of Curaçao Anthony Begina makes a small move the other way (to the right). He is in doubt for one second before the walking away should take place. Watch closely his body language and his eye movement. Mr. Begina hesitated – for half a second – in following Mr. Ellis and first started turning towards Mr. Besaril, before he realized his error. If he would have turned the right way and walked at the same moment as Mr. Ellis, nothing would have looked strange or awkward.
In the video you can see that almost at the same moment Mr. Ellis is turning also Mr. Rutte is turning but he cannot move as he has to wait for the others to start walking.
And you want a confirmation: look at the picture you placed in the paper and you see 3 people moving (Ellis, Rutte and Bijleveld) while the 3 others stand still as a pillar. Who is wrong here.
So we have the picture and we have the text in the paper and “the heavyweight representative” as mentioned in the paper.
The way the picture is presented is quite a different impression because if you look at the video then it is understandable. Here is one picture taken to prove something that cannot be proven!
It is an insult from the paper and Koelega. The facts are – as explained before – definitely wrong. The name is brought in a political assumption in a way that our Acting Minister is walking away and leaving the others to stand there alone. But that is not right. This is what we call worldwide “fake-news.”
Besides that: there is no complaint from the Dutch officials. This looks like a witch-hunt. Did The Daily Herald make a “double-check” to verify the info? Is the only fact that a person is not aware of something also has to react by phone or mail? In Dutch they say: wij gaan niet over een nacht ijs (do not skate on thin ice).
The Acting Minister Plenipotentiary is requesting The Daily Herald:
1. To come with a rectification by the tomorrow-morning paper of The Daily Herald (5/8/2018).
2. To apologize for printing a picture and a story like this, done by The Daily Herald.
If The Daily Herald is not willing to come forward with the above-mentioned request, the Acting Minister Plenipotentiary gave his lawyer Cor Merx already authorization to start legal procedures.
C.H.J. Merx, LLM
Attorney at Law
Editor’s Note: The Daily Herald stands by its story.
Dear Editor,
I got confident the solid eight Parliamentarians of St. Maarten will approve the budget on a timely time and date. It seems they were waiting on the opposition which requested a budget meeting and seems to have needed more time.
Seeing that Holland and Great Britain have such a great relationship. We the citizens of the Commonwealth of Dominica, St. Kitts and Grenada play a great role for all the small territories in the Caribbean in the days of the federation, would like our Parliamentarians to successfully approve the budget today.
We love to see the creativity, ambition and achievement of all the small territories in the Caribbean. Oh yes, the Dutch will get a positive result on the budget.
Cuthbert Bannis
Dear Editor,
On April 3, the judge ruled in the case which former interim island secretary Koert Kerkhoff had initiated against the St. Eustatius Island government. The judge ruled in favour of the government. Kerkhoff had requested the court to instruct government not to obstruct him from continuing his job as island secretary.
First of all, it is kind of remarkable that only last week through Facebook this verdict became known to the public. It gives the impression that the former coalition parties have attempted to keep this information, which also can be considered a loss for them, away from the public.
Although I agree with the verdict, in my opinion the judge did not even take all aspects of this case into consideration. What he overlooked is the fact that there was no extension of Kerkhoff’s original contract that ended August 1, 2017. At the time he was appointed, under the so-called plan of approach, as interim-island secretary for one year. He was never appointed as island secretary. Therefore, he could never even claim that his perceived appointment of August 1st was an extension of his previous position. He also claims that the competent authority continued paying him his salary after August 1st.
The question can be asked, who is this competent authority? This is normally the executive council. Since the signature of the island governor was not there, this, however, cannot have been the case. And this is where this, and other misconceptions about competent authority, stems from. The former commissioners handled as if they were ministers in an autonomous country and as such unilaterally could give instructions, sign contracts and spend government monies.
To take this a step further, it means that when someone does not have the authority of spending or instructing to spend government funds, this individual should be held liable for this.
The judge rightfully concluded that there was never an appointment for Kerkhoff as island secretary after his interim contract had expired, since the approval of the Kingdom Representative was lacking. According to the law, a decision to that extent can only take effect after the Kingdom Representative’s approval.
There is also something very interesting missing in Kerkhoff’s arguments. He is seen as one of the main advisors of the former coalition government and a mastermind behind the created perception that, based on UN resolutions regarding the right of self-determination, Statia’s government could set national laws aside, since they are overruled by international law. The authority of the Kingdom Representative was therefore no longer recognized by the former coalition.
One may wonder why he did not bring up this argument in his case to claim back his position. The answer is rather simple. He fully well knew that this was utter nonsense that was used to fool the people of Statia. But it appeared convincing enough for the former coalition partners who blindly followed his nonsensical ideas, and those of their other advisors.
And we all know what this has brought for us. On February 7, the Island Council, Executive Council and Governor have been set aside until Statia has proven to be able to run the island ourselves again and respect the laws of the land.
Mr. Kerkhoff, thanks but no thanks!
Koos Sneek
Democratic Party St. Eustatius
The opposition wanted the preliminary meeting
To extend into Saturday morning
To block the budget debate on Monday
And toss the country in total disarray
So they pumped the rookie
To climb up the prickly tree
In order to stall the preliminary session
And cause massive confusion
The trainee thought he had de Chairlady hook
When he reminded her he was going by the book
He said he and his colleagues have more to say
But the Chairlady was in no mood to play
So she proceeded to bring the meeting to a close
But the rookie continued to oppose
Saying he and his colleagues were not finished
So she has to entertain their wish
He asked the Chairlady if it's her opinion
To close the preliminary session
A perfect time to measure their wit
And to see who will take the last hit
Calm as the eye of a hurricane
The Chairlady tried to explain
It is her prerogative, as she has that right
Trying her utmost to squash the fight
Poor feller should have known better
Not to weigh iron with a feather
Because her experience and education
Became the weapon for his execution
Then, not a word they utter
The signal for the Chair to close that chapter
An opportunity for the rookie to grow and learn
And know when to speak and wait his turn
Joslyn Morton
Dear Editor,
Well, I guess it’s not hard to guess what kind of neighbours Sunwing by way of Windward Roads are going to be. Its 7:00am on a Sunday morning, and my house is shaking because the demolition of the old Great Bay Hotel is going on unabated. As much as I hate to do it because of the waste and aggravation, I suppose it's time to get the lawyers involved and try to make some order out of the chaos. Find out just what the permits for the demolition allow; what the building plans look like; and how high they intend to build, so we can get the objections and injunctions in early before it's too late.
It's a difficult question. They have spent their money and have the right to build what they want within the local ordinances if any exist or are enforced. That's their right. But what of the rights of the neighbours to enjoy a reasonable and peaceful existence? Where is the fundamental; respect that a corporation that supposedly enjoys a good reputation is supposed to have for the local community? And foremost, what of the rights of the people that live here?
Long gone, it would seem.
Steven Johnson
