In a profound and extensive meeting in the Netherlands, the Aruba delegation was received by members of the Council of State (Raad van State). During this encounter, several topics of great importance were touched upon, especially the advice recently published by the advisory body, which, according to Member of Parliament Endy Croes, confirms a direct reduction in the island’s autonomy.
Croes expressed that the delegation agrees that the Council of State ratifies the existence of limitations on Aruba’s autonomy. According to the MP, the Council of State has already indicated on two occasions that any law with financial implications must first go through The Hague—a fact he considers a direct attack that ‘takes away’ autonomy from the island in that area.
One of the most heavily weighted points during the meeting was the Council of State’s own structural discontent with certain media outlets. Croes explained that this independent and professional body showed its annoyance with the way certain media, including the portal Koninkrijksrelaties, published the advice out of its real context.
The MP went further and regretted that even a minister in Aruba de facto shared this incorrect and out-of-context part on their Facebook account. This, according to Croes, caused annoyance within the Council of State, who are currently in an internal meeting evaluating this misinterpretation of their advice, and for which an official reaction from their side is expected in the meantime.
“The official debate will take place in the Parliament of Aruba, not here in the Netherlands,” Endy Croes, MP (MEP Faction) indicated.
Despite the fact that the meeting brought a lot of clarity to points that were not structurally in the published advice, Croes emphasized, on behalf of the MEP faction, that the controversy and the official debate must be debated within the Parliament of Aruba, in front of the Aruban people, and not in the Netherlands.
Finally, the delegation thanked the Council of State for the reception and the space to clarify these points, where it was reinforced that the financial and legal limitations are structurally anchored in the presented advice.
