Vinaora Nivo Slider 3.xVinaora Nivo Slider 3.x
Vinaora Nivo Slider 3.x

Statia in Peril: The case against “Public Entity”.

Political Analyst, Julio R, Romney

The Court of First Instance in Philipsburg is scheduled (on Tuesday, November 20, 2018) to hear open arguments from the dissolved insular Government of Sint Eustatius which was taken into receivership on February 7, 2018 by its Central Government – The Government of the Netherlands. The dissolved Government officials are of the opinion that the Government of the Netherlands infringed on Statia’s “right to a full measure of self-government” as established by the United Nations and further concluded that the action of the Netherlands is in violation of international law as indicated by the Vienna Convention on the law of Treaties and now seeks the Court of First Instance ruling to reverse the receivership action of the Government of the Netherlands.
To put this into perspective, with the dissolution of the Netherlands Antilles, on October 10, 2010, Sint Eustatius became a Public Entity/Body of the constituent state of the Netherlands. In other words, integrated into the Netherlands as a municipality and as such properly governed under the Constitution of the Netherlands. With the Central Government of the Netherlands having the statutory authority to “exercise supervision” or to oversee the local administration of Sint Eustatius, as provided for under Article 132 of the Constitution of the Netherlands.
Based on media reports, out of concern in which the Government was being administered, the Government of the Netherlands established a committee to investigate the operation and functioning of the Government of Statia. The Committee reported back that the Government of Statia was in a state of “lawlessness and financial mismanagement, threats and insults and the pursuit of personal power”. To this end, the Government of the Netherlands, invoked Article 132 of the Constitution through an Act of Parliament (namely the Temporary Act on Neglect of Duty in Sint Eustatius) and thereby dissolved the local elected government and appointed a “Government Commission” to oversee the governing of the Island.
In defense or to support the claim that with the dissolution of the local elected Government of Sint Eustatius, Statia’s right to a full measure of self-government is infringed upon - the dissolved local elected Government of Sint Eustatius cited Article 73 of the United Nations Charter and insofar as the dissolution action of the Netherlands being in violation of international law Articles 26 and 27 of the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties is cited. In addition, there is also much talk about the use of Article 2 and 103 of the United Nations Charter to further solidify the case. An abundance of caution should be exercise here and the identified Articles should be closely examined with respect to the audience, intent, and jurisdiction of the articles.

First and foremost, it is highly questionable whether or not, more likely not, Article 2 of the United Nations Charter can be used to further solidify the case against the receivership action taken by the Netherlands. Clearly, Article 2 establishes the United Nations as membership base on the principle of sovereign equality. In other words, the content of the Charter speaks to an agreement for adherence between members with the notion that Members are equally sovereign. Respectfully, Sint Eustatius is not sovereign and as such not a member of the United Nations, but only a lower administrative body (municipality of the Netherlands) of a sovereign member of the United Nations - the Kingdom of the Netherlands. This is addressed in the 7th part of Article 2 which states that “nothing contained in the Charter shall authorize the United Nations to intervene in matters which are essentially within the domestic jurisdiction of any state or shall require the Members to submit such matter to settlement under the Charter”.
As for article 103, this Article addresses a conflict between Members, where their obligations under the Charter shall prevail. Again, Sint Eustatius is not a member of the United Nations and the conflict is of a domestic nature between the local government and its Central government, so there is nothing to prevail within the realm of the United Nations Charter.
With that said and in regard to the view that the dissolution of the local elected government, Statia is deprived of “a full measure of self-government” which is recognized in Article 73 of the United Nations Charter as paramount and encourages all its members to promote self-government in its administration of territories. Operationally, the basis of self-government warrants that administrative governed bodies to have self-rule and control of their internal affairs, free from external government control or outside political authority. Where self-rule does not extend to the right to unilaterally do as pleases within the Constellation, but expect to govern or follow the established rules and regulations of the Constellation.
Given the factors laid out in Article 73 to determine whether a full measure of self-government is being attained i.e., assurance the people social, political and educational advancement, just treatment and protection against abuse; take the political aspiration of the people and assist them in progressive development and; promote constructive measures of development none of these appeared to be violated. There is no question that there is hindrance with the receivership of the local government.
Second, without prejudice to Articles 26 and 27 of the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties, they have no binding force on the lawfulness of the Government of the Netherlands dissolving the local elected Government of Sint Eustatius. Specifically the Temporary Act on Neglect of Duty in Sint Eustatius that was for the dissolution of the local elected Government of Sint Eustatius. In general, the Vienna Convention on Law of Treaties applies to agreements between states. While the Temporary Act on Neglect of Duty in Sint Eustatius is presumably an agreement between the Government of the Netherlands and the local elected Government of Sint Eustatius it is not a treaty. What is a treaty? A treaty is an agreement entered into by two or more states, mainly of sovereign powers. Again, these Articles do not apply to the circumstances of Sint Eustatius.
The governing principle to which the Statia peril/ crises points to a political discourse rather than a legal case. The crises are integrated into its (Statia’s) political statutory status as a Public Entity (of the Netherlands), the creation of conditions that the polity of Statia is not preparing to live under and appeared not to have understood from the inception. All parties must take care to determine the needs and welfare of the people of the Territory of Statia and place these before politics. The suggestive crises impasse here is through political dialogue in institutional-building and likewise comprehension.


Union requests meeting to discuss the eradication of poverty.

To: The Council of Ministers of Sint Maarten
C/o The Honorable Prime Minister Mrs. Leona Romeo-Marlin
Government Administration Building
Pond Island, Philipsburg
Sint Maarten
Philipsburg, November 1st, 2018

Re: Repeat request for meeting to address: “Poverty Eradication, Equality and the Right to Development for the people of Sint Maarten.”

Honorable Ministers,

We hereby repeat our request dated August 18th, 2018 for a meeting with the Council of Ministers to dialogue with the Ministers on how we can realize “the eradication of poverty, equal rights and the right to development of the people of Sint Maarten”, as development priority in the Kingdom of the Netherlands.

The Governing Program 2018-2022 “Building a Sustainable Sint Maarten, The National Recovery and Resilience Plan-Government of Sint Maarten, The Financial Recovery Plan 2018-2022- Government of Sint Maarten have not been discussed with the Sint Maarten Anti-Poverty Platform. We would therefore like to dialogue with your Council of Ministers, how the poverty eradication, equal rights and the right to development of the people of Sint Maarten in the Kingdom of the Netherlands can still be implemented in the aforementioned programs.

We would like to quote from the Governing Program that was signed by all Ministers and the Parliamentarians of the coalition: “Through consistent dialogue and improved public services, the government will strive to realize a socially and economically sound Sint Maarten.”

Awaiting your invitation for this meeting on behalf of the Sint Maarten Anti-Poverty Platform, we remain

Respectfully yours,
The co-coordinators

________________________ _______________________
Mrs. Claire Elshot-Aventurin Mr. Raymond Jessurun
President of WICLU Vice President SMSPA

To: The Parliament of Sint Maarten
c/o President of Parliament Mrs. Sarah Wescot-Williams
Philipsburg, Sint Maarten

Philipsburg, November 1st, 2018

Re: Repeat Request for meeting to address: “Poverty Eradication, Equality and the Right to Development for the people of Sint Maarten.”

Honorable Members of Parliament,

We hereby repeat our request dated August 18th, 2018 for a meeting with members of Parliament to dialogue on how we can realize “the eradication of poverty, equal rights and the right to development of the people of Sint Maarten”, as development priority in the Kingdom of the Netherlands.

The Governing Program 2018-2022 “Building a Sustainable Sint Maarten, The National Recovery and Resilience Plan-Government of Sint Maarten, The Financial Recovery Plan 2018-2022- Government of Sint Maarten have not been discussed with the Sint Maarten Anti-Poverty Platform. We would therefore like to dialogue with our members of Parliament, how the poverty eradication, equal rights and the right to development of the people of Sint Maarten in the Kingdom of the Netherlands can still be implemented in the aforementioned programs.

We would like to quote from the Governing Program that was signed by all Ministers and the Parliamentarians of the coalition: “Through consistent dialogue and improved public services, the government will strive to realize a socially and economically sound Sint Maarten.”

Awaiting your invitation for this meeting on behalf of the Sint Maarten Anti-Poverty Platform, we remain

Respectfully yours,
The co-coordinators

________________________ _______________________
Mrs. Claire Elshot-Aventurin Mr. Raymond Jessurun
President of WICLU Vice President SMSPA

 

Open Letter to Our legal Minds.

Dear Editor,
Sometimes, things happen in politics that triggers me to question. The media brought the issue regarding the island of St. Eustatius taking Holland to court. As a result, St. Eustatius decided to start legal proceedings against the Dutch government, after the Netherlands removed the legally elected Members of the Island and Executive Councils of Statia from office.
Based on their argument for their decision, I had expected Holland to take legal action against one or more of these government officials in St. Eustatius. And charge them with wrongdoing or neglect of duties; however, this did not happen.
So I would like to know if Members of the Island Councils who were duly elected by the people of St. Eustatius can be taken to court for wrongdoing or neglect of duty.
When the Lt. Governor and the Commissioners were put out of office, the salaries for those functions were also stopped, and according to information, those persons are not receiving a salary.
The Kingdom of the Netherlands consists of four (4) countries, namely Aruba, Curacao, Holland, and St. Maarten. Saba, St. Eustatius and Bonaire have been embedded in Holland, and even though this has happened, it was always the case that the six (6) islands of the former Netherlands Antilles would always have the right to determine their constitutional future.
Recent news reminds us that Holland cannot pull out of this relationship and leave the other islands by themselves. In other words, Holland cannot put any of the islands out of the Kingdom without the permission of other countries.
In the past, the Kingdom government and or Holland would levy higher supervision on an island. This would happen together with a plan of action, which would contain a budget and a timeframe.
Can we say that Members of the Island Council are hired and or elected by the people?
Can Members of the Island Council be put aside and be replaced by persons who were not elected by the people?
Now that this has happened on St. Eustatius, can it also be repeated on another island?
Can this be done on Aruba, Curacao or St. Maarten? Is this article 43 at work?
Those questions I can ask Members of Parliament, but. I would like to hear the opinion of our legal minds, as it pertains to this issue. St. Maarten consists of so many law firms and or lawyers, and I am sure, there must have been someone thinking of this while paying close attention to the situation.
Do we have to wait until a professor emerges from across the Atlantic and he/she writes an opinion, after which, we comment or do we have enough legal minds of our own to have a healthy exchange?
Your input /opinion is important...

drs. Rodolphe Samuel

An Open Letter to All Journalists.

jamalkhashoggi25102018By Arlene J. Schar and Dr. David R. Leffler

Terrorism has taken a disturbing turn with the horrific murder of journalist Jamal Khashoggi. Apparently, the intent of this murder was to send a message to all journalists dedicated to thoughtful criticism of government. Therefore, what would be the most appropriate journalistic response to such blatant censorship? Is it to continue to report in good conscience, and risk brutal death? Or is it to step away from any controversial reporting and deny the truth to those who need to hear it?

There is yet a third response, one which carries no risk to those reporting it. That response would be to publicize a little-known means of ending all war and terrorism once and for all: Invincible Defense Technology (IDT).

Throughout time, militaries have sought to achieve invincibility by applying ever-advancing technologies. History shows they have so far been unsuccessful. Adversaries inevitably devise methods to counter any system of offense or defense. However, there is a scientific, military field-tested solution which has arisen from the latest discoveries in the Unified Field theories of physics, neuroscience, and the social sciences--not from approaches utilizing weaponry, and not from the field of politics.

Invincible Defense Technology: A Non-Religious, Humane and Beneficial Approach
The practical components of IDT are the non-religious Transcendental Meditation (TM) and the more advanced TM-Sidhi programs. When large groups of experts practice these programs together, a powerful field effect of coherence and peace is generated that spills over into the surrounding population. This effect has been shown in extensive scientific research that has repeatedly confirmed measurable decreases in war deaths, terrorism, and crime. Studies have also shown, for example, reductions in verbal hostilities and hostile acts, increased number of cooperative events, and other improvements in quality of life such as reduced accidents, hospital admissions, and infant mortality. These are all tangible signs of reduction of societal stress. Due to this research the non-profit organization Global Union of Scientists for Peace (GUSP) advocates this simple and cost-effective approach for reducing social stress (see: https://www.gusp.org/global-peace-summit).

South American Security Forces Reduce
Collective Social Tensions
with Invincible Defense Technology

Large Groups of IDT Experts Defuse Collective Stress,
Create Prosperity, Economic Growth, and Peace for All
In highly stressed areas of the globe, establishment of large groups of experts practicing IDT has led to increased prosperity and economic growth, including a decrease in the "misery index," an indicator of socioeconomic stress, and a significant increase in competitive growth. These positive changes in social trends have occurred concomitant with implementation of IDT approaches. This coherence-creating effect was documented on a global scale in a study published in the Journal of Offender Rehabilitation. When large assemblies of civilian IDT experts gathered during the years 1983-1985, terrorism-related casualties decreased 72%, international conflict decreased 32%, and overall violence was reduced in nations without intrusion by other governments (summaries of this research are available at: https://davidleffler.com/2011/sapratableii). Due to these positive changes, militaries in South America and Africa are now actively field-testing this approach. They have already established IDT Prevention Wings of the Military to reduce crime, quell violence, create prosperity, prevent the rise of enemies, and create the conditions for lasting peace.
Invincible Defense Technology is Cost-Effective
For about the cost of a few modern fighter jets, any military could establish a group of 15,000 warriors trained in this advanced IDT approach. This Prevention Wing of the Military would practice IDT programs twice a day in large groups, which would defuse social tensions not only in their country but also globally. Studies indicate that, once such a program becomes operational, societal conditions in their country and other countries worldwide will immediately improve. The collective consciousness of all populations will rise through the influence of greater harmony and peace. Better solutions will occur to the people and their leaders for improving their own living conditions. Those who have engaged in violence will no longer do so. Studies have shown repeatedly that this method works--and will continue to work as long as the peace-creating group is maintained.
Implementation
The quickest and most effective way to implement this alternative would be for heads of states to issue an order to their militaries to deploy this new method. Once successfully implemented, a social phase transition would immediately begin in which the high societal stress which globally fuels crime, poverty, terrorism, and war would be alleviated. By greatly dissipating these formerly intractable problems nationally and globally, these heads of states would thereby be celebrated as great humanitarians and examples of global leadership.
Nothing Else has Worked.
Given the many approaches previously tried by world leaders that have not worked, including many inhumane actions, it is certainly worth giving this benevolent approach a try. It is simple, inexpensive, and has a track record of high success. Any country large or small could become the global leader of this cutting-edge brain-based technology. With IDT, their country would become invincible, they would be creating lasting peace worldwide, and their military would be globally respected and admired.
It’s Time for Journalists to Advocate Something New and Proven
Journalists have a responsibility to bring truth to the people; in their unique position they also have the capability to enlist the media in creating a better world for all. Here is an opportunity to ensure that Jamal Khashoggi and all others who have stood up for the truth have not died in vain.
About the Authors:
Arlene J. Schar is the Executive Assistant at the Center for Advanced Military Science (CAMS). Her husband Dr. David Leffler served as an Associate of the Proteus Management Group at the Center for Strategic Leadership, US Army War College. Currently, he serves as the Executive Director at CAMS (http://www.StrongMilitary.org).

Ripple effects.

Dear Editor,

Everything affects everything. We are interconnected, we are interdependent. Hurricane Irma has had a negative effect on many of us but I will not use her as the sole focus of this article. Let’s talk about one of the most important subjects in the world. Money or our income. We know our health is the most important one but If we don’t have an income we can’t pay our bills. Mortgage, rent, utilities, food, clothes, education, school fees, uniforms, books you name it. I have heard it said that one should have at least 6 month’s savings equivalent to our monthly expenditures. Easier said than done. If we are employed and paid the minimum wage or less, it means that we are part of the working poor. I am sure that there are other definitions but I leave that up to you to do the research. As I mentioned earlier, it is said that we should have at least 6 month’s savings equivalent to our monthly expenditures. Question, how can one save when we are earning the minimum wage or less? What kind of rent can we afford to pay? Hence the shacks which all too often can lead to unsanitary situations, and in addition to that, dangerous situations where extension cords are passed from one building to the other. Another thing minimum wage or less means we can’t afford medical coverage or private insurance. This is why it is important to get the National Health Care Insurance Law or policy in place. At the same time some employers refuse to register us with SZV. It means that depending on the seriousness of your condition you might die. When you go to the Supermarkets what can you afford to buy? It is said eating is healthy I will add it is also expensive. I think more consistent control should be held on imported goods. Someone sent me a copy of the 21page price list from the economic affairs department informing the public of government prices for food, construction materials, produce and so on. I randomly picked out one particular item. The Bop Insecticide spray. The list mentioned the 250 mL and 450 mL quoting the price on each. Reality is that there is also the 600 mL can that is sold but it is not mentioned on the list. I think it’s time government determines what products can be brought into the country, especially the Brand names. Quality is what has to be first and foremost. I listened recently to a discussion held on eradicating poverty by now I think 2030. I think the gold post has been moved several times. It stated that world production has increased by 70% but wages by only 20%. In other word we are producing more but earning less income. Translation the rich get richer and the poor poorer. To me it does not matter how many meetings, discussions, forums are held on this subject, as long has the status quo continues where persons are working harder but making less or not compensated, we will spend the next 100 years talking and things will only get worse. Companies are profiting off the backs of the people. Why can’t we also benefit? Let me close with this. Wells Fargo Bank will be laying off some 26000 persons or so between now and 2020 because they are going digital. (Cutting cost, who care about the social ramifications). What kind of ripple effect will this have? Locally Banks on St Maarten are also on the same track to do likewise. Not positive for sure. Ripple effect.

George Pantophlet


Vinaora Nivo Slider 3.x

RADIO FROM VOICEOFTHECARIBBEAN.NET

Vinaora Nivo Slider 3.x
Vinaora Nivo Slider 3.xVinaora Nivo Slider 3.x
Vinaora Nivo Slider 3.x
Vinaora Nivo Slider 3.x
Vinaora Nivo Slider 3.x
Vinaora Nivo Slider 3.xVinaora Nivo Slider 3.x
Vinaora Nivo Slider 3.x