Originally, in the constitutional discussions after the war, there was a proposal for more equal representation between the two main islands: Aruba and Curaçao. This is often referred to as the “8–8” idea.
Initial proposal: 8–8
In the early debates, some plans proposed:
- 8 seats for Curaçao
- 8 seats for Aruba
- the other islands (Bonaire, St. Maarten, St. Eustatius, Saba) with separate representation.
The idea was to maintain a political balance between the two largest islands.
Change to 12–8
Eventually, during negotiations with the Netherlands and the structure of the Interimregeling Nederlandse Antillen, the system changed.
Main reasons:
- Curaçao had a larger population
The Dutch government argued that representation should be based on population. - Curaçao was the administrative center
The central government of the Netherlands Antilles was located in Willemstad. - Political pressure from Curaçao’s elite
Political leaders in Curaçao preferred a system that gave them a majority in the States.
Result
- 12 seats for Curaçao
- 8 seats for the other islands combined (Aruba, Bonaire, and the Windward Islands).
Consequences for Aruba
For Aruba this was problematic because:
- Aruba remained a permanent minority
- Important decisions were dominated by Curaçao
This fueled the autonomy movement, which eventually culminated in Aruba’s Status Aparte.
The role of Gerrit Antonides van Poelje
An interesting historical fact is the role of Gerrit Antonides van Poelje, author of the 1942 report on the political future of the Netherlands Antilles.
What Van Poelje proposed
In his study, Van Poelje observed that the Antillean islands were not equal in terms of:
- population size
- economy
- political interests
He particularly noted that Aruba was developing differently from Curaçao, mainly due to the oil industry.
Therefore he suggested that the Netherlands should consider:
- a less centralized political structure
- the possibility that islands could have more individual autonomy.
Why this was important for Aruba
Van Poelje’s ideas were important because:
- he officially recognized that Aruba had a special position
- he questioned the idea that all islands should be governed as one single country.
These ideas later served as intellectual arguments for Aruban politicians.
The Netherlands did not fully follow the recommendation
Instead, the Netherlands chose a different model:
- one country: the Netherlands Antilles
This led to:
- the Interimregeling Nederlandse Antillen
- later the Charter for the Kingdom of the Netherlands
Within this system, Aruba remained inside the Antilles, which created political tension.
Historical irony
Interestingly, Van Poelje’s idea that islands could have different political positions eventually became reality decades later with:
- Aruba’s Status Aparte
The final result was quite similar to what Van Poelje had already suggested in the 1940s.
Henny Eman and the decision to support the Interimregeling
Historically it can be said that Henny Eman ultimately chose to work with the model of the Interimregeling Nederlandse Antillen rather than pushing for the more radical ideas from Van Poelje’s report.
However, this must be understood within the political context of that time.
Difference between the two options
Van Poelje Report (1942)
A study and recommendation that:
- argued the islands were different
- opened the possibility for a less centralized structure
- suggested more autonomy for individual islands.
Interimregeling (1948)
The real political solution implemented by the Netherlands.
It created:
- one country: the Netherlands Antilles
- a common parliament
- a representation system (including the famous 12–8 system).
Why Eman chose the Interimregeling
Eman supported the Interimregeling for several practical reasons:
Political reality
The Dutch government was not willing at that time to separate the islands.
Gradual progress
Eman believed that step-by-step autonomy was more realistic than demanding immediate separation.
Avoid blocking reform
If Aruba rejected the proposal, it was possible that no constitutional reform would pass at all.
Consequences of the decision
This decision created two historical interpretations:
Criticism:
Some Arubans believed Eman gave too much power to Curaçao.
Defense:
Other historians argue that he achieved the first real step toward autonomy for the Antilles.
Three visions of Aruba’s autonomy
A simple way to understand the debate about Aruba’s autonomy is to compare the ideas of three important figures:
Van Poelje – The academic vision (1942)
- The islands had different economic and social interests
- Government should not be too centralized
- Each island could have more individual autonomy
His ideas opened the door to thinking about a system in which Aruba could have a different position from Curaçao.
Henny Eman – Gradual strategy (1940s–1950s)
- Aruba should have more autonomy
- but within the Antillean system
- reforms should happen step by step
He accepted the Interimregeling Nederlandse Antillen, even though Aruba did not obtain the political power many had hoped for with the 8–8 proposal.
His strategy was pragmatic and gradual.
Betico Croes – Movement for separation (1970s–1980s)
- Aruba should separate from the Antilles
- eliminate Curaçao’s political dominance
- create a separate country within the Kingdom
His struggle ultimately resulted in:
- Status Aparte for Aruba
Historical conclusion
The struggle for Aruba’s autonomy did not happen all at once.
It was a long process in which:
- Van Poelje introduced the idea
- Eman achieved the first political reform
Croes ultimately achieved the separation from the Antilles