A group of ten parliamentarians, consisting of the factions of MEP, PPA, and parliamentarian Mike de Meza (AVP), expressed their deep concern and dissatisfaction with the decision of the Presidency of Parliament not to convene a publicly requested meeting that was officially submitted.
According to parliamentarian Edgar Vrolijk, the request for this meeting aimed to debate the current situation of the country of Aruba and to allow each member of Parliament to clearly position themselves: who is in favor and who is against the matters under discussion regarding the Rijkswet HOFA.
“The moment has come when you can no longer hide,” parliamentarian Edgar Vrolijk stated.
Violation of the Rules of Order
The main point of discussion is based on the Rules of Order, which are the fundamental pillar regulating the internal functioning of Parliament. Vrolijk recalled that these rules have a high hierarchy, being directly linked to the Constitution (Staatsregeling).
- According to the rules, when three or more members request a public meeting, it must be convened within a period of 30 days.
- If, for any reason, this deadline cannot be met, the President of Parliament has the obligation to provide a properly substantiated justification.
Questionable justification
To the surprise of the opposition factions, the response received from the Presidency of Parliament was negative. The decision not to convene the meeting was based on letters received from the factions of AVP and Futuro, which indicated that they would not provide quorum. Additionally, it was mentioned that they must wait for an “explanation” (uiteenzetting) from the Council of Advice regarding the relevant laws before proceeding.
The speaker characterized these actions as an “abuse of power” and a violation of the democratic rights of the representatives of the people.
“It is shameful that you send a letter telling the President that you will not provide quorum to convene a meeting,” parliamentarian Edgar Vrolijk stated, indicating that these matters belong to Parliament and should not be obstructed by decisions of the Government or advisory bodies at this stage. However, the President of Parliament, Marlon Sneek, is allowing this.
Consequences for democracy
The absence of this meeting is seen as a tactic to avoid debate at a critical moment a moment to inform the people of Aruba about what the Rijkswet HOFA truly is, what its effects are, and also what position the parliamentarians those elected by the people of Aruba are taking.
With ten parliamentarians standing behind the request, the opposition believes there is sufficient representation for the debate to take place, and they regret that the current coalition is using its position to obstruct the transparency that the people of Aruba deserve.