The recent working visit of the Dutch State Secretary to Aruba, taking place between July 14 and July 16, 2026, was marked by an administrative secrecy that raises serious questions about the transparency of the Government of Aruba’s management and the constitutional relationship with the Netherlands. The series of meetings in which the Dutch official participated took place without the Parliament of Aruba or the Aruban people being aware of the objections, content, or results of these encounters.
Lack of transparency on HOFA The main focus of attention is the management surrounding the Sustainable Public Finances of Aruba (HOFA). Despite the vital importance of this process for the country’s financial future, there is no consensus or clarity on the next steps. It is noted that closed-door deliberations are taking place between the State Secretary and the AVP-FUTURO Government, with particular emphasis on the role of the Minister of Finance, Geoffrey Wever.
Critics point out that, like Minister Gerlien Croes, Minister Geoffrey Wever demonstrates a lack of accountability, which is interpreted as a disregard for the constitutional duty to inform the legislative body. The concern grows when the State Secretary himself confirms that there are two regulations underway: the Landsverordening LWHO to be passed in the Parliament of Aruba and the Rijkswet to be handled in the Netherlands. However, the Parliament of Aruba lacks essential information to exercise its oversight function. The Parliament of Aruba is not informed of absolutely anything regarding the intentions and changes to HOFA.
Constitutional impact and the role of the Council of State According to statements attributed to the State Secretary, the deliberations are based on two pieces of advice from the Netherlands, including one from the Council of State (Raad van State). In this process, the advice issued locally in Aruba has remained in the background, if not ignored entirely. This perspective is denounced as a form of “administrative neocolonialism,” where the Netherlands imposes its vision on a country that, constitutionally, should be an autonomous partner.
The position of the Netherlands, in which Dutch advice prevails over Aruban advice, suggests that the financial autonomy of the country is under constant pressure. The State Secretary stated that he is open to “doing something better,” but the criticism is that in practice, the decisions taken are limiting Aruba’s ability to chart its own course, forcing a regression in the autonomy that should have been protected.
Responsibility of Parliament This dynamic highlights the role of the parliamentarians of the AVP-FUTURO coalition. It is questioned whether these legislators are being manipulated to vote in favor of measures that go against the interests of their own people?. The public perception is that the current Government is leading Aruba into a “dark FUTURE,” threatening the foundations of the country in such a way that it is reviving conditions reminiscent of the years prior to 1986.
The way the State Secretary left Aruba on July 16, without giving any official statement or answering questions from the people and Parliament, is considered a lack of institutional respect. This silence, accompanied by the lack of transparency from the Government of Aruba, leaves the citizenry in a state of uncertainty, questioning whether Aruba’s national interests are being sacrificed in closed negotiations in The Hague, given that Aruba’s advice is being disregarded and the AVP-FUTURO government itself is allowing these steps.