A tense and heavy atmosphere dominated the latest session of the Parliament of Aruba, where opposition parties strongly raised their voices against what they consider a “dictatorial attitude” from the President of Parliament, Marlon Sneek. The controversy escalated due to the lack of answers from the Minister of Finance and Economic Affairs, Geoffrey Wever, regarding the direct link between the Investment Fund (Investment Fonds) draft law and the requirements of the Rijkswet HOFA.
The debate grew heated when members of the opposition factions confronted the Minister, demanding clarification on page 4 of the law, which links it to HOFA and stipulates how this fund will function. According to the questioning, the so-called Begrotingsfonds (Budget Fund) appears to be an instrument to seize structural control and weaken Parliament’s budget right (budgetrecht), leaving crucial decisions solely in the hands of a committee designated by the Council of Ministers.
A Debate Without Room for Democracy
The session was marked by continuous interruptions where the President of Parliament, Marlon Sneek, repeatedly closed the microphones of the parliamentarians, cutting off their freedom of speech legally stipulated in the Rules of Order (Reglamento di Ordo).
• Muzaninne Wever (FUTURO Faction): Opened the debate by demanding respect for Article 37 of the Rules of Order. Wever formally requested that the debate remain strictly structural on the topic of the fund, without mixing it with the HOFA controversy, arguing that the public needs clarity and not distortion. This request shows that there is an internal fear, and it demonstrates that Parliamentarian Muzaninne Wever does not want to fulfill her responsibility as a parliamentarian for the Country of Aruba.
• Eduard Pieters (Leader of the PPA Faction): Strongly questioned the legality of the debate since there is no structurally approved Consensusrijkswet. Pieters emphasized that on Page 4 of the law, it states very clearly how the functioning of the fund is tied to austerity tools. He indicated that due to the lack of a solid legal basis, this law could not be treated that day.
• Edgar Vrolijk (MEP): Highlighted the lack of respect and the way meetings with Minister Geoffrey Wever are continuously canceled and rescheduled. Vrolijk categorized the situation as a “dictatorship” where ministers refuse to face Parliament or answer its questions.
• Evelyn Wever-Croes (Leader of the MEP Faction): In a concerned tone, pointed out that the government coalition itself is reacting in total panic following the announcement of Mike Eman’s departure as Prime Minister. Mike Eman asked Parliament to evaluate this transition of power with caution to avoid a governmental vacuum, while public funds are being centralized away from the public’s view.
At the same time, even though page 4 of the investment fund law clearly states that it is tied to HOFA, Minister Wever denies any direct link. In the house of the people, Minister Geoffrey Wever repeatedly denies it, even though everything is written very clearly on page 4.
In his defense, Minister Geoffrey Wever attempted to lower the tension by explaining that the Begrotingsfonds Investment Fund has nothing to do directly with the HOFA law. According to the minister, the initial funds will come from the country’s general ordinary budget. He added that if HOFA enters into force in the future and gives the country more financial “space” through refinancing, they could then decide to allocate more money to the Begrotingsfonds, but that this is not a structural condition right now.
However, the MEP parliamentarians did not accept this explanation and refuted the Minister on the spot:
• Endy Croes (MEP): Hit back using the Memorie van Toelichting (Explanatory Memorandum) of the same law, reading textually from Page 4, where it is clearly written that the funds and credit facilities are formally tied to the Consensusrijkswet for the public finances of Aruba. Croes accused the Minister of trying to lie to Parliament to its face.
• Xiomara Maduro (MEP): Questioned whether the Minister does not read his own laws or if the coalition is trying to “protect” him so he doesn’t speak about HOFA. “Either he doesn’t read the law, or today they want to protect a minister so he doesn’t talk about HOFA,” Maduro declared, indicating a lack of transparency and political maturity, adding that it is clear they cannot manage a country the way it should be.
• Dangui Oduber (MEP): Closed the debate by accusing the minister of a “total lack of respect” toward Parliament, explaining that the official document states that the funds structurally come from cooperation and loans with the Netherlands. Oduber concluded that the meeting could not continue because the ministers were not speaking with the truth on the table. However, the President of Parliament cuts the mic when he doesn’t like what is being said, which shows a dictatorship in the house of the people.
The session closed in an atmosphere of consternation, leaving a deep question mark in the community about whether Aruba is heading toward a dangerous centralization of power where Parliament is losing its core democratic value—a modus operandi that the current AVP-FUTURO government is practicing.
Dictatorship and Lack of Transparency in Parliament Regarding Investment Law Tied to HOFA
