The political conflict surrounding the multimillion-dollar contract of the Aruba Tourism Authority (ATA) has reached another level. During his weekly conference, Member of Parliament Eduard Pieters (PPA) responded directly to Minister Cecilia’s statements, rejecting the notion that the questions raised by PPA could be presented as an attempt to “criminalise” the Government.
For Pieters, it is precisely the opposite: “I am doing my work as an MP. Criminalisation is when a minister does not adhere to the law and avoids presenting documents to justify or contradict their actions.”
With that statement, Pieters completely shifted the focus of the debate. PPA is not accusing anyone of a criminal act. What PPA is demanding is something much more basic: official documentation proving that the Government followed the legal procedure.
Official letter to the Council of Ministers
Pieters confirmed that PPA officially sent a letter to the Council of Ministers, through Prime Minister Mike Eman, with a copy to the minister concerned.
According to Pieters, the letter focuses on four fundamental legal points following the public meeting held by Parliament regarding the waste collection contract funded by ATA.
“The letter is not political. The letter is juridical.” According to Pieters, during the parliamentary meeting PPA finally received some documents, including a contract with EcoTech and a “Request for Support.” But, according to him, an essential document is still missing: “The proof that the mandatory public tender procedure actually took place and the ministerial decree (MB).”
Where is the public tender?
Pieters explained that the main concern is that Article 21 of the National Ordinance Establishing the Aruba Tourism Authority (Landsverordening Instelling Aruba Tourism Authority) obligates the Minister of Tourism and ATA to adhere to public tender rules.
According to the MP, throughout the entire debate, the Government presented no evidence that this mandatory process was followed. “That is precisely why Parliament has a control function.”
PPA is also asking for a copy of the ‘ministerial disposition (MB)’ which, according to Pieters, must officially show the instruction given by the minister to ATA pursuant to Article 20 of the same law.
“We are not against the project”
After the Government expressed that PPA is trying to stop a positive project for Aruba, Pieters responded firmly. “PPA is not against making Aruba clean! PPA is not against waste solutions. PPA is against stepping over the law.”
According to Pieters, Parliament’s constitutional role is not to promote the Government, as the 11 “cheerleaders” do, but to verify whether the Government acts within the legal framework.
“It’s not the minister’s money”
Pieters also repeatedly emphasized that the funds under discussion do not belong to any minister. “The 2.1 million florins are not the minister’s money. It’s not PPA’s money. It is the money of the people of Aruba.” According to Pieters, precisely because public resources are involved, Parliament has the obligation to control how the money is spent within legal margins. “That is what we took an oath for as MPs.”
“You cannot say Parliament is criminalising”
The strongest point of his reaction was when Pieters directly answered Minister Cecilia’s statements. According to the MP, the minister is labeling legal questions as an act of “criminalisation,” and that is a dangerous attempt to derail the debate.
“I didn’t accuse anyone. I asked for documents.” But Pieters added that if a minister cannot show that they followed the law, the criticism cannot be presented as a political attack.
“When you don’t stick to the law, that is the real problem. Not the questions Parliament asks,” Pieters further elaborated.
Parliament cannot continue to be intimidated
Pieters also lamented previous statements made by various ministers who have been busy minimising Parliament, describing the political debate as “childishness and nonsense” (muchachada y co’i loco).
For the leader of the PPA faction, that attitude weakens one of Aruba’s most important democratic institutions. “Parliament is not an obstacle. Parliament is the institution chosen by the people to control the Government.” And according to Pieters, PPA will continue to insist on documentation, transparency, and compliance with the law. “We are not looking for confrontation. We are looking for clarity. And as long as the documents are not on the table, we will keep asking the questions that the people have the right to know before taking the next steps!” Eduard Pieters concluded.