Clarity on private jet flight: Questions remain unanswered while LAR rules in favor of information request
The discussion surrounding Minister Gerlien Croes’ official trip on a private jet to Curaçao continues to grow. While the minister maintains that she has no obligation to account for her private expenses, formal instances such as Administrative Jurisprudence (LAR) think otherwise.
In a recent statement on her Facebook page, Minister Gerlien Croes chose to shift the focus of the debate, suggesting that Parliament wants to go so far as to control how she spends her personal salary. However, this argument misses the actual point under discussion.
No one is asking the minister to show her bank balance, where she buys her clothes, or how she manages her personal income. The central question remains transparent and consistent: Who paid for or facilitated the private jet flight she used to travel to Curaçao within the framework of an official function. It is the DUTY of every minister to account to the Parliament of Aruba.
A critical element in this case is that the matter has transcended the sphere of a simple political debate between parties. According to available public information, Administrative Jurisprudence (LAR) has given a clear opinion: the requested information must be handed over.
In this context, the minister’s statement — “I have no duty to give them” — demonstrates the indecency, nerve, and arrogance of this minister, pretending that she can do whatever she wants with the people’s money, travel for work anytime and anyhow WITHOUT accounting to Parliament, which is the body that controls the ministers of Aruba to prevent the misuse of the Country Aruba’s money.
A minister bears public responsibility, and when it comes to the exercise of public function, transparency is not an optional choice nor a punishment, but a democratic DUTY. Critical questions do not automatically mean an accusation of corruption, but the duty the official has to tell the truth and not hide it. Perhaps with this private jet flight situation, the minister is no longer fit to hold office? Perhaps this is her fear and why she keeps hiding?
To close this case cleanly and remove all doubt, the key questions remain:
• When was it paid?
• How much was paid?
• Who was it paid to?
The fastest and most effective way for a ruler to demonstrate integrity is by answering these points, instead of moving the goalpost of the discussion in another direction without looking in the mirror. Clarity is the only path to close such a case.
Besides this, if the minister cannot answer these three questions, who can trust Minister Gerlien Croes with the budget of the Country Aruba, the management of the Country Aruba, the negotiations of the Country Aruba, and HOFA?