A Minister Must Be Accountable: Transparency Is Not an Option, It Is a Legal Obligation
During the IPKO meetings that took place at the end of February, one topic stood out within the Dutch delegation: the private jet trip of Minister Gerlien Croes. In conversations with two former judges, who have a sharp perspective on this matter, they pointed out two critical issues that Minister Croes can no longer ignore: absolute transparency and the strict rules regarding gifts for a public office holder.
An Insult to Our Constitution and Parliament’s Rights
It is a national embarrassment that a Member of Parliament must resort to a LOB request (Public Access to Government Information Act) to obtain information that should already be public and accessible. In a healthy democracy and throughout the rest of the Kingdom, it is standard practice for a minister to account for their travel and expenses without placing obstacles around the issue.
Article III.16 of our Constitution gives a parliamentarian the sacred right to receive information. Questions such as “How much did the jet cost?” and “Who paid for it?” are simple, direct, and fundamental. If Minister Croes publicly states that she personally paid for this working trip, then she has the moral and legal obligation to provide proof of payment. Transparency is not expressed with words; it is demonstrated with receipts.
The Integrity Law: A Gift or a Violation?
If the minister cannot prove that she paid for the trip herself, the situation becomes legally precarious.
Under the Integrity Law, such a trip would be classified as a “gift.” Article 13 of that law requires that any gift be declared within a reasonable period of time. That deadline has already passed.
Furthermore, the Integrity Law requires that the Prime Minister inform Parliament if a public official receives gifts. This is not about “persecuting” a minister, as Minister Gerlien Croes suggests. It is about demanding compliance with the law that we ourselves approved in Parliament. A law is a law, and for a minister it should be an example to follow.
The Code of Conduct: The 250 Florin Limit
Another point where the minister appears to be in legal conflict is the Code of Conduct that applies to ministers. Article 5 clearly states that a minister and their partner must register all gifts, whether money, services, or something like a flight on a private jet.
- The golden rule: If a gift is worth more than 250 florins, the minister has the legal duty to refuse it.
A trip on a private jet costs thousands of florins. Therefore, legally it should not even be registered because it exceeds the permitted limit. If the minister accepted this trip as a gift, she acted against the Code of Conduct. If she paid for it herself, then why the hesitation to show the bank transfer?
Conclusion: Between Integrity and the Truth
Minister Gerlien Croes is undermining a constitutional right by failing to provide information. Within the Kingdom, this is unacceptable. When a minister declares that she personally paid, she puts her own integrity on the line.
If she does not present proof of payment, then she effectively admits that she failed to comply with the Integrity Law and the Code of Conduct.
“Minister Gerlien Croes, as a parliamentarian I am not persecuting you nor asking for a favor. I am simply demanding that the law be respected. The people deserve transparency, not excuses,” Vrolijk concluded.