Dear Editor,

There is never a dull moment in Sunshine City. Wednesday, May 14, 2025, riot at the Point Blanche prison illuminated this fact. The daring incident was another experiment, orchestrated to erode and expose the weaknesses of the justice system. Furthermore, the situation has also tested the integrity, tolerance and resilience of Justice Minister Nathalie Tackling.

Thanks to the collaborated effort of the minister, fire fighters, marines, police force, ambulance personnel, VKS and national detectives, for bringing this threat of security under control. Despite the cry for lack of capacity, each member of the team came together and exercised their individual skills – competencies that intertwined with versatility and care for the community.

There were declarations of heroism of an inmate, but that is yet to be determined. Since the facts are unclear at this point, it is best that I restrain my thoughts. My only remark is: It is very strange that the individual who is rumored as being heroic is part of the group who want early release. Until I know who is the mastermind and collaborators behind this horrible incident, for me, the real heroes are those mentioned in the second paragraph.

Minister Tackling, it seems as though that there is a deliberate effort to keep you off balanced. Every time you try to solve one problem, another one springs up to delay ongoing matters that demand your full attention. However, don’t be discouraged by these unforeseen challenges. Embrace them, because they are a confirmation that you need to broaden your vision on the hindrances that can disrupt the operation of each section of your ministry.

This is why having a competent staff is such a critical component, and definitely, the backbone of the ministry. If I’m reading you correctly, it appears as if you are doing the bulk of the work, which will affect you mentally and physically, in the long run, if this burden is not being shared more evenly.

Minister, you need an independent team to apply the SWOT Analysis technique in all areas of your ministry. This constant vigilance will keep you closely connected to the various departments. As a result, this approach helps to foster a more harmonious relationship between you and the justice personnel, which will eventually reduce the risk of unnecessary discontent.

Finally, as challenging as the situation may be, try your utmost to remain calm and do not blame anyone nor make any hasty decisions. Your task is to collaborate with your investigative team to establish the origin of the disturbance, and when due diligence is reached, then you can make your decisions – resolves, that are based on facts and in accordance with the rule of law.

Joslyn Morton

Dear Editor,

It seems as if it is forbidden for the Council of Ministers to put heads together and jointly take decisions on what to do about the rise in crime during these last months.

It would be absurd to resign ourself to the concept that it is among ourselves. No kind of violence should be accepted. Even though statistics are very important, perception can be very influential. What I know is that there is much talk in the community about the change in law enforcement. Not in defense of the police, but I strongly believe the lack of “Sunday schools”, parents doing multiple jobs and no fathers’ guidance has led to this mass disobedience among the later generation.

I functioned as head of the security and discipline coach at the PSVE during the school year 2006/2007. Statistics will show that during that school year the passing percentage went up 20% more in comparison to the previous school year. During that school year the person who contracted me to work at the school died halfway through the school year. While preparing for the following school year the new president of the board spoke to me and told me that the budget will not suffice to maintain me on the job. I accepted to leave.

On my way out one of the schoolteachers stopped me and asked me what decision was taken. When I told him, his visibly irritated response was BS. During the meeting yesterday she told us that you make the teachers look small because you came in here like a one-man gang and put discipline in the place. She didn’t care that the general passing grade went up more than 20%.

After that a leader of government asked me to assist him with the Vocational School.

Russell Simmons

By Alex Rosaria

On some political lists – though not all – that participated in the (pre)elections, there were new and promising candidates who, however, did not receive the necessary support from the electorate. What is also notable is that many of them appeared on the list without the necessary knowledge of our governance structure, political history, laws, principles of debate, oral skills, and even familiarity with our national anthem.

Those who know understand that finding quality candidates (excluding those who are opportunistic) is a difficult task.

It is unfortunate when these promising individuals get lost in the political maze. Many times, parties have little “support structures” to stimulate and encourage candidates with potential to improve themselves after the elections, which results in them simply becoming political contenders. Next time, parties rush to find new people instead of retaining their promising candidates.

It would be beneficial to work on a structure to educate and upgrade promising candidates – not only on legal and governmental aspects but also on political history, ideology, and oral and debate skills.

I quote Jossy Henriquez, President of the Colonial Council before the Estates convened in 1938: … realizing that the quality of the people who must manage the structure is the most important aspect of our democracy. After 90 years, we still have not realized this.

~ Alex David Rosaria (53) is a freelance consultant active in Asia & the Pacific. He is a former Member of Parliament, Minister of Economic Affairs, State Secretary of Finance and UN Implementation Officer in Africa and Central America. He is from Curaçao and has an MBA from University of Iowa (USA). ~

Dear Editor,

Since writing the article “Will giving pensioner tax breaks bankrupt government” about a month ago I have received phone calls and met some pensioners and it is apparent that the situation on the manner which they are being taxed continues unabated.

I don’t go on Facebook nor do I use Instagram or any other available social media so I don’t know if there have been any comments on this subject positive or negative. I have always said that there is no pressure like people pressure. I really hope that government or Parliament addresses this serious concern that the pensioners have regarding the manner in which taxes are being collected from them. It has been ongoing for a long time.

I can remember many years ago someone said to me that I should start saving to pay taxes. I did not understand it at the time but today I do. The way this is functioning now, one stands the possibility of losing their home, their vehicle, their furniture and, yes, your mind. The stress that comes along with it is unimaginable. Keep in mind that you have been filing your taxes faithfully every year but because they are 4, 5 years or more behind with their assessments they can force you to pay in a timeframe determined by the law, it is said, which I think should be made known to the public.

Imagine if you have an apartment or apartments or any other income and as a good civic citizen submit revenues derived from such when filing your taxes, you will be paying taxes for life and such I understood is passed on to your children and grandchildren; you get the drift. Unfortunately, although I don’t agree with this behaviour it is one of the reasons why there are persons who do not submit this information when filing their taxes. Government loses income and then the low-hanging fruits who are abiding by the law are penalized.

The tax collection ordinance has to be amended. A former colleague and I were busy with article 6 of this ordinance, they wanted to make changes in some of the articles. My focus was on Article 6.1 where I wanted just one word to be changed and that word is “can” I wanted to change it to “must” when it comes to making arrangements with the Receiver’s and the taxpayer. The word “can” gives the Receiver’s too much power to determine how much the taxpayer should pay, while the word “must” would allow the taxpayer to pay to have a say in what he or she can afford. As it is now, the taxpayer has no say in the matter.

I can already hear the argument that government depends on tax-generated revenues. My response is: then get your Inspectorate and Receiver’s up to date. I understood that there are persons who are paying taxes as far back as 2017. Please explain which tax law makes this possible. I was told that the taxpayer can take government to court to contest the fact why the Receiver can’t force one to pay more than what they can afford. I heard the Receiver can demand up to 30% of your income without taking into account your other expenses. It is said that the taxpayer would win the case, but how many pensioners or other taxpayers have the finances to go to court?

Another injustice is if you are owed a tax refund, they decide when you will be repaid with no interest for holding on to your money for years. How old are these laws, by the way? 80 years? 50? Where did they originate in the first place? We are living in different times. These are slave laws. Laws are supposed to punish those that break them and protect those that obey them. The Inspectorate nor the Receiver’s can change these antiquated slave laws, it is the responsibility of government/parliament to initiate and amend laws. What are they waiting on? The pensioners are waiting.

George Pantophlet