Dr. A.B. van Rijn, Professor of Administrative and Constitutional Law at the (former) University of the Netherlands Antilles (UNA) discusses "The Right of Government (The Council of Ministers) to dissolve Parliament".
On page 216 of his excellent textbook entitled "Constitutional Law of the Netherlands Antilles" (Staatsrecht van De Nederlandse Antillen), which appeared in 1999 professor van Rijn offers an in depth explanation of exactly what the right to dissolve Parliament is, and how it works in practice when used in cases where Parliament sends home the government by means of a vote of no confidence.
THE CONFLICT RULE: THE MIRROR IMAGE OF PARLIAMENT'S RIGHT TO DISMISS GOVERNMENT.
Professor van Rijn defines the right to dissolve Parliament as the "Conflict Rule". In the former Netherlands Antilles this right was regulated in Art. 88 of the Country Regulations of the Netherlands Antilles. In country St. Maarten in is regulated in article 59 of the Constitution of Country St. Maarten.
"The right to dissolve Parliament", van Rijn writes, " is passed by means of a Landsbesluit or Country Resolution. This right can be seen as the mirror image of the "confidence rule". (n.b. the confidence rule, which is found in the explanatory notes to the constitution of Country Sint Maarten, states that ministers must resign when Parliament passes a vote of" No Confidence" against them).
This right is not subject to any restrictions. It is however a violation of the principle that elections are held every four years, and should therefore be used only in exceptional cases. The right to dissolve Parliament is the instrument of government in the power play between government and Parliament. It arose as a means to resolve conflicts between government and Parliament. If there is an unbridgeable difference of opinion between both, Parliament can dismiss the government by means of a vote of no confidence. Government in turn can dissolve Parliament in order to let the voters have their say. The existence of that right, means that Parliament has to be careful. If Parliament forces the issue, it runs the risk of ending up holding the short end of the stick," according to Dr. van Rijn.
WHAT THE PRIME MINISTER DID NOT SAY:
Article 20 of the rules of order of the Council of Ministers of Sint Maarten state that decisions are made by the majority. There are at present seven Ministers in the Council. Therefore, it takes four ministers to pass the resolution to dissolve Parliament. Article 13 states, that the council meets whenever two or more ministers request a meeting. The Prime Minster was therefore wrong when she suggested that government should not dissolve Parliament and obstructed the Council of Ministers from voting on the matter. This is a right of government, and it was meant to be used precisely in a situation in which we presently find ourselves, with government facing a vote of confidence by Parliament. Finally, it is not her decision, but a decision as taken by the majority in the Council of Ministers that counts. She will, in the final analysis, be forced to submit to the will of the majority in the Council of Ministers. That's just the way it is, has been, and always will be, in a Democratic State.
Click here to read a short excerpt of Staatsrecht van De Nederlandse Antillen by Dr. A.B. van Rijn.
