A request was submitted for a Public Meeting (Openbare Vergadering – OV) to discuss the issue of HOFA, but the parliamentary factions of the Aruban People’s Party (AVP) and Futuro Party (FUTURO) sent a formal letter indicating that they will not provide quorum for the meeting and that they prefer to wait until the Council of State of the Kingdom of the Netherlands delivers its official advice.
This means that if the President of Parliament calls the public meeting, the session will not be able to proceed because neither the AVP nor the FUTURO faction will be present. In practice, this effectively places a halt on the request to discuss the matter immediately.
For many citizens and political observers, this situation raises concerns about transparency and willingness to engage in public debate on a matter considered to be of great national importance.
Position of the factions
They indicated that they prefer to wait until the legal advice of the Council of State of the Kingdom of the Netherlands is finalized before continuing with formal discussions in Parliament. According to their argument, this approach is part of a lawful and orderly process.
Criticism from the opposition and public sector
Critics describe the decision as an act of political obstruction, pointing out that the lack of quorum prevents an immediate debate on the HOFA issue.
Amid this situation, the central discussion has become:
Should Parliament wait for official legal advice before debating, or should the debate begin as soon as concerns arise within the community?
The debate surrounding HOFA continues to generate strong reactions in society, and the decision not to provide quorum has added further tension to the current political discussion. Citizens, petition signatories, labor unions, and members of the public in Aruba have expressed their position clearly:
“NO to the Rijkswet HOFA.”