When a Kingdom Law (Rijkswet) proposal touches on autonomy, governance, and the financial future of Aruba, the minimum the people can expect is transparency, especially when the proposal faces so much resistance in society.
However, we see State Secretary Eric van der Burg express that the HOFA Kingdom Law will be changed, but at the same time, he does not want to reveal what those changes are. The insistence on treating this law in an accelerated manner, without providing clarity, sends a very worrying signal.
Massive resistance in the community This lack of clarity comes at a crucial moment when the rejection of the HOFA Kingdom Law is evident:
More than 10,000 citizens have presented their objections.
There are expert opinions questioning the constitutional basis of the proposal.
Most trade unions have expressed their opposition.
Voices within the Government’s own coalition have manifested concern. Despite all this, the people still do not know what changes have been made or if the concerns have actually been taken seriously.
More than a financial issue What is most worrying is that the AVP-FUTURO Government continues to speak almost exclusively of the supposed financial benefit of refinancing debt, but HOFA is not just a financial issue. It is a constitutional issue that defines how Aruba’s autonomy will be executed in the future.
Transparency is an obligation A government that believes in transparency would have published the changes, explained why they were made, and created space for a serious debate before Parliament makes a decision. What we see now is precisely the opposite: a request to act quickly, but without providing clarity. This does not contribute to trust, does not strengthen our democracy, and is certainly not the respect that the Parliament and the people of Aruba deserve in a dossier with such profound implications.
The people of Aruba have the right to know exactly what is being changed, why it is being changed, and whether the changes respond to the objections that thousands of citizens, experts, and organizations have presented. Transparency is not a favor that the AVP-FUTURO government or State Secretary Van der Burg is doing; transparency is an obligation. And precisely when a proposal is so questioned, that obligation becomes even greater.