The current political situation surrounding the introduction of the Rijkswet (HOFA) is not only a constitutional concern, but also a disgrace to the institutional integrity of our Parliament. It is regrettable to observe how the President of Parliament, Marlon Sneek, in an attempt to protect the government’s actions, has chosen to misinform the public about the reality of the surrender of autonomy to the Netherlands.
A Limited Debate and a Fixed Role
Contrary to what some would like the public to believe, the space for real debate in this process is minimal. Once the law is already on the table, the timeline is dictated by the Netherlands, and the local government cannot vote on the law, but must instead prepare a report. Parliament’s role is reduced to drafting a “report” (verslag) that must be sent to the Netherlands, and once the “Nota naar aanleiding van het verslag” (NAV) is answered, the path is cleared to place the bill on the agenda of the Dutch House of Representatives.
Here there is no equal exchange of ideas; there is a predetermined route in which Aruba has little to say — in fact, almost nothing.
The Danger of Representation
A critical point that the public must understand is representation in the Dutch House of Representatives (Tweede Kamer). Even though Aruba has the right to send delegates, the final decision remains in the hands of the majority in Parliament. If that majority decides not to participate or not to authorize the trip, Aruba’s voice becomes structurally silenced at the very center of decision-making within the Kingdom.
Manipulation of the Reality of the LAft
It is deeply concerning when attempts are made to convince the public that the structure of the National Ordinance (LAft) has not changed. In 2023, the LAft law was already amended, breaking the trust that should have existed. The difference between a national law and the Rijkswet that is now being imposed is enormous.
Under the new Rijkswet, Aruba would be accountable directly to the Netherlands and not to its own institutions. The power to issue an “aanwijzing” (instruction) becomes far more direct and swift, eliminating the protections that a national law previously provided.
The End of the Right to Amend
To make matters worse, the document of August 26 is very clear: the national law can no longer be changed as easily as before. The right of parliamentarians to submit amendments to correct legislation becomes practically nullified, since prior consultation and approval are required — effectively tying our hands.
Using the position of President of Parliament to conceal the shame of surrendering autonomy is a lack of respect for the electorate. A parliamentary leader should be the first guardian of our autonomy, not the first to surrender it under falsehoods and manipulation of information.
President of Parliament, the FUTURO faction and the AVP faction — with the exception of Mike de Meza — must continue to be closely monitored in this process. There is no doubt that the politicians elected in the last election risk betraying an entire people.
In the history of the country of Aruba, the year 2026 may remain marked as the moment when Parliament failed to defend the interests of its own people, particularly the FUTURO faction and the AVP faction, with the exception of Mike de Meza