Dear Editor,
One cool Friday evening, old school friends Irma and Maria got together for drinks and dinner at a popular West African bar and restaurant. The ambiance was perfect. The latest and most popular African tunes filtered throughout the crowded room. It was a typical Friday night where friends met friends and families’ night out was the buzz at the restaurant.
Single ladies Irma and Maria were seated within a bird’s eye view of two buff and handsome African men competing at a pool table in the corner of the room. “Uumm,” sighed Maria. “What’s wrong?” asked Irma, “Is the meal not to your liking?” “No, it’s not the meal,” said Maria, “I was thinking about that silly Jose divorcing me after 10 years of marriage for that watering can Katrina.” “Look!” shouted Irma sternly, “We are here to have a good time and for you to get over that weak cry baby that is good for nothing but shedding tears.”
Grabbing Maria by the hand Irma said, “Come, let’s go play a game of pool, we can challenge the men to a game at the table.” “You are right, let’s do just that,” responded Maria, “After all, I didn’t come out tonight to feel sorry for myself. Let’s not talk about Mr. All-huff-and-no-puff Jose.”
Both girls were laughing as they approached the pool table. “Well hellooo,” said a handsome chocolate-skinned male. Flashing perfect white teeth he asked, “Are you beautiful little ladies here for us big strong men to teach you how to play?” “No, not at all, responded Irma, “We know how to play pool. We thought maybe we can challenge you and your friend to a game, ladies against men?” This request coming from two little ladies, wearing nail polish and makeup made the men at the pool table erupt in loud laughter while eying Maria and Irma from head to feet. “Listen ladies, go back to your little table and talk about shopping or cooking or whatever it is ladies do.”
“Hey Luis, these are delicate ladies, so watch your manners man,” Said the other guy to his pool buddy. “You are right Hurricane Harvey, sorry ladies pardon my manners, I am Hurricane Luis and this is Hurricane Harvey, perhaps you’ve heard of us? And you ladies are?” “This is my friend Maria and I am Irma.” Looking Hurricane Harvey and Luis confidently in their eyes, Irma asked, “Now that we have gotten the introductions out of the way what do you say to our challenge at this pool table, or are you big and strong hurricanes afraid to get the wind knock out of you by two delicate ladies?” said Maria with a smirk.
Hurricane Harvey became annoyed at the girls teasing he said, “Look ladies I have caused widespread catastrophic flooding in Texas and along the Gulf Coast and my friend Hurricane Luis here have brought destruction to many islands in the Caribbean, including the beautiful and friendly island of St. Maarten. We wouldn’t want to embarrass you two beautiful tropical depressions at the pool table, it would be like taking candy from a baby.”
“We are manly hurricanes that date girls like Hurricane Donna,” said Luis, and Harvey said, “It’s not about you; we have an image to maintain, but you both are extremely beautiful developing ladies so I’ll tell you what,” Harvey continued, “You both go out there in September and show us how strong you are to compete with us two powerful hurricanes and we will take you both up on your challenge.”
“In fact, we’ll even marry you if you can both prove to us how strong you are!” said Hurricane Luis.
The girls shook the guys’ big strong hands and Irma said “Keep practicing boys, we’ll meet you back here in December at the end of the hurricane season.” Then whispering to Maria, Irma said “Silly guys, when they will learn to never, ever underestimate the power and strength of a woman!”
Name withheld at author's request.
Dear Editor:
Art. 36 of the Kingdom Charter stipulates that the Netherlands, Aruba, Curaçao and Sint Maarten (will) provide each other aid and assistance. According to the Explanatory Notes, countries within the Kingdom will consult, assist and cooperate with each other. Furthermore: they are supposed to consider each other’s justified interests and to support each other, both morally and material, as far as reasonably possible.
According to the Explanatory Notes the above can be considered a cooperation between countries in the Kingdom on a voluntarily basis. The following questions can be raised:
* Does the article stipulate that under circumstances, countries within the kingdom can demand financial assistance from other countries in the Kingdom?
* Does the article stipulate how financial aid should be quantified in practice? Can Sint Maarten, based on this article, demand payment of amount X from the Netherlands, Arbua and Curacao?
* Can one country sue another country if it would believe that this other country doesn’t provide sufficient financial aid?
The answer to all these questions is: no.
In every imaginable form of relationships (human or on country level, bilateral or multilateral) it is very common that parties negotiate about conditions of agreements, they intend to enter. Volunteer organizations (like, for example, the Red Cross) provide aid, but will – as a rule – set conditions before funds or material aid will be released.
Professor Goudappel (Trouw, October 19, 2017) stated in her opinion that “there are no indications, also not in the history of the law, that conditions could be attached to this.”
This may be true; however, the opposite is true as well: nowhere in art. 36 of the Kingdom Charter, the explanatory notes or the history of the law, it is stated that countries do not have the right to negotiate about conditions to be attached to an offer to provide financial aid. The conclusion of professor Goudappel in this regard is therefore not convincing at all.
From a constitution point of view, under the circumstances, a political agenda can be attached to the offer to provide financial aid, as it is part of the political game, according to a recent opinion of constitutional expert Professor Arjen van Rijn.
In addition: neither in art. 36 of the Kingdom Charter nor in the Explanatory Notes on this article, is it stated that the (mutual) commitment to provide each other aid and assistance may not lead to any form of interference. It is just (too) simplistic to assume that St. Maarten just has to ask for help and that then the other countries must deliver, whatever Sint Maarten deems reasonable.
It is correct to state that, as an autonomous state, Sint Maarten is completely in control of everything within the country and that it has the right to self-determination. However, warranting greater goods like good governance, proper administration and legal certainty are Kingdom affairs. It also must be noted that, according to the Kingdom Charter, every country within the kingdom must arrange its own affairs and its own finances (!), while all countries within the Kingdom should be willing to support each other.
The above considerations reveal the sensitive point in the negotiations and demonstrate that it is not so black-and-white as presumed by the editor of the Today in his opinion of October 22, 2017, in which he jumped to the conclusion that “it has now been established beyond a reasonable doubt that there is no basis for making these demands in the Kingdom Charter.”
It cannot reasonably be disputed that after Hurricane Irma, Sint Maarten is not able to arrange its own internal affairs (itself) and to be financially self-supportive, while (i) nowhere in the Kingdom Charter it is prohibited to attach conditions to an offer for financial aid, (ii) from a constitutional point of view and under the circumstances it is not illegal to attach a political agenda to this offer and (iii) the Kingdom Council also has an obligation to warrant good governance and proper administration, based on this legislation.
Finally: (iv) Sint Maarten already committed itself to both conditions set by the Dutch government; therefore, it cannot be said that the autonomy of Sint Maarten is infringed upon because of the imposing of these conditions.
Based on all the above, in my view it is not incomprehensible that the Netherlands attached two conditions to the offer for substantial financial aid.
Roeland Zwanikken
Partner at BZSE Attorneys at Law
Dear Editor,
Sint Maarten is a democratic country, of which the constitution is based on the so called ‘rule of law’. But what does this mean?
The rule of law is the legal principle that law should govern a nation, as opposed to being governed by decisions of individual government officials. It is a structure which protect the rights of citizens from arbitrary and abusive use of government power, and implies that every person is subject to the law, including people who are lawmakers, law enforcement officials, and judges.
An example of the rule of law is that government can only restrict actions of individuals if there is a legal basis for this. In other words, if a law grants this authority to government.
Recently the Minister of VROMI issued a press release, wherein he stated that persons wishing to salvage or remove a vessel in the Simpson Bay Lagoon must request permission for such activity. I contacted VROMI, and they informed me that salvagers should request a permit for this. According to VROMI, the legal basis for this requirement can be found in the Ordinance containing measures for the removal of wrecks in sea and on the beach.
However, this law only contains provisions regulating the removal of wrecks by government, and allowing government to recover the costs of such from the responsible persons. This law contains no provision or statutory basis for requesting permits from owners/interested parties to remove or salvage vessels.
The recent reports in the press that people were stopped from salvaging and/or removing vessels, and the statement made by the Acting Division Head of Inspection, Mr. Claudius Buncamper, that two permits were issued to salvage vessels[1], seem to indicate that the Minister is acting contrary to the rule of law. This would be very reprehensible, since the rule of law forms the (thin) line between a legitimate government and a dictatorship. Failure to adhere to the rule of law should immediately be rectified by Government for it to maintain its legitimacy.
I therefore call upon the Minister of VROMI to provide clarity on this issue, and to clearly communicate to the public of Sint Maarten the legal basis for requiring a permit for the removal and salvaging of vessels in the Simpson Bay Lagoon, as well as the requirements that one must meet to obtain such a permit.
Pieter Soons, attorney at law
Mr. Soons is a partner at BZSE, attorneys at law.
[1]The Daily Herald, 20 October 2017
Dear Editor,
Sint Maarten is a democratic country, of which the constitution is based on the so-called “rule of law.” But what does this mean?
The rule of law is the legal principle that law should govern a nation, as opposed to being governed by decisions of individual government officials. It is a structure which protects the rights of citizens from arbitrary and abusive use of government power, and implies that every person is subject to the law, including people who are lawmakers, law enforcement officials, and judges.
An example of the rule of law is that government can only restrict actions of individuals if there is a legal basis for this. In other words, if a law grants this authority to government.
Recently the Minister of VROMI [Public Housing, Spatial Planning, Environment and Infrastructure – Ed.] issued a press release wherein he stated that persons wishing to salvage or remove a vessel in Simpson Bay Lagoon must request permission for such activity. I contacted VROMI and they informed me that salvagers should request a permit for this. According to VROMI, the legal basis for this requirement can be found in the Ordinance containing measures for the removal of wrecks in sea and on the beach.
However, this law only contains provisions regulating the removal of wrecks by government and allowing government to recover the cost of such from the responsible persons. This law contains no provision or statutory basis for requesting permits from owners/interested parties to remove or salvage vessels.
The recent reports in the press that people were stopped from salvaging and/or removing vessels, and the statement made by the Acting Division Head of Inspection, Mr. Claudius Buncamper that two permits were issued to salvage vessels, seem to indicate that the Minister is acting contrary to the rule of law. This would be very reprehensible, since the rule of law forms the (thin) line between a legitimate government and a dictatorship. Failure to adhere to the rule of law should immediately be rectified by Government for it to maintain its legitimacy.
I therefore call upon the Minister of VROMI to provide clarity on this issue, and to clearly communicate to the public of Sint Maarten the legal basis for requiring a permit for the removal and salvaging of vessels in Simpson Bay Lagoon, as well as the requirements that one must meet to obtain such a permit.
Pieter Soons, attorney at law
Mr. Soons is a partner at BZSE, attorneys at law.
Dear Editor,
In reference to the article in The Daily Herald on Monday, October 23, 2017, page 3, Entitled “Yacht Owner: ‘Marinas should not offer slips during hurricane season,” I would like to offer the following response.
Whomever the yacht owner is that sent the comments to the paper is not at all wrong and closing the marinas during hurricane season is certainly an option and one that we have often considered. That said; there are some other issues that we have had to take into consideration as well that should be known.
Over 75 per cent of the vessels at the marina during this past hurricane were local yachts, meaning that they are here in St Maarten year-round and run their business out of here. A good deal of these yachts are locally owned and registered and thus St Maarten is home port. If we are to close the marinas where do they go? How many trips south will they have to make, only to return a week later? How do they know when to leave and where to go?
While this past storm was well predicted and pretty much stayed on track with the predictions, this is not always the case and oftentimes the owners of these vessels fear heading south only to end up heading into the storm, rather than away from the storm.
There is not enough storage and or haul-out space in St Maarten to accommodate hauling all vessels out and thus some people find themselves with no other choice but to weather the storm at the dock and or on anchor. The logical decision for most is on the dock so they have the possibility to get off the yacht if the storm so warrants it.
A good deal of the damage caused was from yachts that did not start the storm at the marina but simply ended up there from wherever they were moored.
No reputable marina will ever deny a yachtsman safe harborage in the event of a storm. We urge them to leave, we sometimes insist that they leave, but at the end of the day if they refuse to leave and or elect to stay, we can’t send them out into harm’s way.
As for the comments regarding the damage to the dock and the collection of such damage from the yachts: Once again we do whatever we can to urge these yachts in question to head out and explain to them all that they are docking at their own risk and that should they choose to stay their insurance will be responsible for their yacht and the damage to our dock. Remember, this is their choice after having been well informed and after having signed to and agreed to the terms of staying.
As a community we prepared our homes, vessels, cars and personal belongings for a natural disaster to the best of our ability. The destruction that occurred is heartbreaking, but turning our backs on the local boatowners was not something the marina was prepared to do.
In the passing of Irma at least those who were at the dock had the option to get off their vessel onto the dock to seek shelter. Had they been on anchor, which would have been their only other option, the outcome might have resulted in personal injury and/or worse, loss of life. Let’s not lose focus on the bigger picture; we are focused on cleaning up, rebuilding and jumpstarting the economy for future of St Maarten.
Jeff Boyd
President Marine Management and Consulting
