Caribbean Body for Reform and Development
(Rijkswet Caribisch Orgaan voor Hervorming en Ontwikkeling (COHO):
Is it viable?
An Invited Analysis
Requested
By: The Parliament of Sint Maarten
Permanent Committee of Kingdom Affairs and Interparliamentary Relations
Presented
By: Julio R. Romney, B.A., M.P.A., A.B.D
Sint Maarten Institute for Public Policy Studies (SIPPS)
Legislative Hall of the Parliament of Sint Maarten
Philipsburg, Sint Maarten
April 26, 2022
What is the Draft Kingdom Law Caribbean Body for Reform and Development (COHO)?
The proposed Drat Kingdom Law Caribbean Body for Reform and Development (COHO) seeks to establish a ‘Kingdom Administrative Entity’ in the Caribbean constituent states of the Kingdom of the Netherlands (Aruba, Curacao, and Sint Maarten) with the aim “to promote administrative reforms in Aruba, Curacao, and Sint Maarten, achieve sustainable public finances and strengthening the resilience of their economy, including the rule of law necessary for this”.
[2]
With seemingly fewer receptions and greater rejections for the establishment and/or realization of COHO, there are many pros and cons to consider.
COHO (The Proposed Draft Kingdom Law Caribbean Body for Reform and Development)
There are many pros and cons of COHO, and it’s important to understand both sides to get an idea of what this COHO resource/ entity is capable of and whether it is a good or viable entity for our [Sint Maarten] development administration, sustainable public finances and economic resilience needs.
COHO Pros
1. It could be the basis for facilitating the needed socio-economic development of Sint Maarten in light of the post-constituent state downgraded credit rating from a Baa1 to a Baa3 by Moody, citing the lack of sustainable economic activity and no obvious comprehensive plan or insufficiency in the implementation of strategic economic development measure to bring forth a revitalized Sint Maarten that would improve the business climate (economic structure), infrastructure, public/ government finances and the lives of the people of Sint Maarten.
2. Facilitating the build-up of Sint Maarten’s economic and social infrastructure through “Country Packages” (Landspakketten)/ National Development Aid. Economic and social infrastructures have been devastated by a series of natural disasters (hurricanes Irma and Maria in 2017) and further by the recent COVID-19 pandemic.
The National Development Aid is said to be “investments aimed at achieving necessary administrative reforms, sustainable public finances and strengthening the resilience of the economy, including the rule of law necessary for implementation” (Article 3), and only to be concluded with the mutual agreement between the Netherlands/ the Kingdom and Sint Maarten pursuant to Article 38(1) of the Charter for the Kingdom of the Netherlands1”. (Article 5.3)
1 “The Netherlands, Aruba, Curacao, and Sint Maarten may enter into mutual arrangements”. The Charter for the Kingdom of the Netherlands. Article 38(1)
[3]
In addition, the National Development Aid “may provide that projects, programs, and measures are developed and implemented without the support of COHO” (Article 5.4), and COHO may not exercise powers conferred by National Law of Sint Maarten on the public authority of Sint Maarten”. (Article 4.2)
3. COHO provides for the National Development Aid projects and programs to be approved, in collaboration and implemented by COHO and Sint Maarten’s Minister of General Affairs as opposed to them being channeled through the World Bank and implemented by the National Recovery Program Bureau (NRPB), as presently is the case. As such, there will be less bureaucracy and more available monies for Sint Maarten.
4. Access to human resources capacity, which readily avails Sint Maarten of the essential building blocks to optimize development at this time in our socio-economic reconstruction.
5. Legal protection. In the event that COHO is carrying out its task and mutual disputes arise, it is possible to appeal COHO’s decision directly to the Court of First Instance of the Common Court of Justice of Aruba, Curacao, Sint Maarten, Bonaire, Sint Eustatius and Saba. If the Court of First Instance finds, in action, that the decision of COHO is unlawful or unreasonably unfounded, it may declare the appeal well-founded. Subsequently, an appeal can be lodged against the decision of the Court of First Instance with the Common Court of Justice of Aruba, Curacao, Sint Maarten, Bonaire, Sint Eustatius, and Saba. Chapters 2, 3, 5, and 6 of the Sint Maarten Regional Administrative-jurisdiction Regulations shall apply mutatis mutandis. (Article 32)
COHO Cons
In the analysis of COHO, several possible pros were identified as to what makes COHO a viable body “to promote administrative reforms on Sint Maarten, achieve sustainable public finances, and strengthen the resilience of its economy, including the rule of law necessary for this”. However, there are cons that should be kept in mind when considering whether COHO is the best strategy for promoting or implementing these reforms. And to what extent is it likely to encroach on Sint Maarten’s Constitutional autonomous governing authority. Here are some of the main cons of COHO:
[4]
1. The composition of COHO. Sint Maarten (as well as Aruba and Curacao) will have very limited influence on the composition of COHO. The COHO leadership/ board is said to be composed of 3 members, all approved by the Minister of Interior and Kingdom Relations, under with the supervision of the Council of Ministers of the Kingdom of the Netherlands. In effect, establishing membership criteria for selecting nominations to determine who will be Board Member is largely done by the Kingdom (Article 9) thereby rendering Sint Maarten no opportunity to decide the composition of COHO, whose decisions could have a profound impact on the governance of Sint Maarten - this brings into question the “representativeness” of COHO. A more equitable composition of COHO leadership (decision-making process) should be sought.
2. COHO, jointly with the CFT of Sint Maarten, is poised to have overriding powers concerning financial matters (Article 32) which could have profound implications on the Parliament of Sint Maarten’s Constitutional right to control and legislate its finances. These overriding financial powers of COHO seem to violate the “separation of powers” as laid down in the Charter for the Kingdom of the Netherlands affording Sint Maarten the Statuary authority to conduct its internal interest, which includes financial matters, “autonomously” within the Kingdom. Though the intent might be to ensure or promote financial management and accountability.
A Sustainable Future
Ultimately, objectively examining the pros and cons of the proposed Draft Kingdom Law Caribbean Body for Reform and Development (COHO) will help make an informed decision about whether it’s a good law for the socio-economic development needs of Sint Maarten or whether it’s not a development law strategy worth pursuing. Regardless of one’s political outlook on COHO one must think about the best course of action available to abate the economic stagnation, crumbling social infrastructure, needed governmental finance reforms, and provide empowering opportunities for the population of Sint Maarten.
To paraphrase J. F Kennedy
Ask not what Sint Maarten can do for you – ask what you can do for Sint Maarten
I Thank You!
[5]
References
Regels omtrent de instelling van het Carivisch organ voor hervorming en ontwikkeling (Rijkswet Caribisch organ voor hervorming en ontwikkeling)
Romney, Julio R. 10.10.10. ˃20 Sint Maarten’s First Deade as a Constituent State of the Kingdom of the Netherlands. A Turbulent Constitutional Odyssey.
Romney, Julio R. A Comprehensive Plan for Economic Development in Sint Maarten: Bringing Forth a Sint Maarten Revitalization
