The discussion surrounding the kingdom’s structural draft laws for financial supervision has entered a crucial phase. While Aruba is in the grip of the proposed Kingdom Act HOFA (Houdbare Overheidsfinanciën Aruba / Sustainable Government Finances Aruba), the echo of this debate has reached political peaks in Curaçao. In an exclusive interview, the President of the Parliament of Curaçao, Fergino Brownbill, highlighted the fundamental differences between the financial regime that Curaçao lives under—the Kingdom Act on Financial Supervision (RFT)—and the highly stringent legal framework that the Netherlands wishes to impose on Aruba.
Brownbill’s analysis sheds a bright light on the level of autonomy that each island organically retains. According to the legislative leader of the sister island, the RFT in Curaçao has a primarily regulatory and general framework function to keep public finances as orderly and manageable as possible, without this implying a direct intervention in the daily political decisions of the country.
The Limitation of the RFT: Only for Capital Loans in Curaçao
Brownbill explained in detail the only moment when the structural supervision mechanism in Curaçao requires formal approval from the supervisory body. “For us, the RFT is to frame something. It sets a regulation for you to keep your public finances as orderly and manageable as possible,” the official declared. He emphasized that the intervention of the Netherlands or the supervisory body has a very clear and transparent limitation within the law.
“The only moment a visible decision has to be made, or an approval—let me correct myself, ‘approval’—and that approval is necessary only when the country decides to take out a loan. And you can only take out that loan for your capital balance and not for your current balance.” — Fergino Brownbill, President of the Parliament of Curaçao
This signifies an abysmal difference from the control attempts that Aruba is facing. Under Curaçao’s RFT, sovereign decisions on internal projects, public investments, and government management remain entirely in the hands of the country itself, categorized under autonomous governance. The Netherlands cannot interfere in these strategic decisions, as long as they do not touch structural external loans that affect Curaçao’s capital balances.
Aruba under the shadow of a stricter regime
When the President of the Parliament of Curaçao was confronted with the reality that Aruba is facing via the Kingdom Act HOFA—a legal instrument that many analysts consider a national law transformed to give complete and absolute control over public finances—Brownbill expressed himself cautiously but very directly in his definition: “For you, that is a bit more stringent. Within the framework of the ‘HOFA,’ as the concept of the Council/HOFA is drafted, that is much stricter.”
He highlighted that Curaçao structurally does not know this type of dynamic. “For us, the only thing we know is the RFT. And derived from that, you have the supervisory board (CFT). But it is not the case that we have a national law to give or grant any type of direct or unilateral legal supervision to the Netherlands,” Brownbill clarified, leaving open the conclusion that Aruba’s current proposal goes much further in surrendering its national financial prerogatives.
A Constitutional Alert for Aruba
The Kingdom Act HOFA is not simply a copy of Curaçao’s RFT, but a structurally more rigid instrument, designed to significantly reduce the budgetary room for maneuver of Aruban rulers.
While Curaçao sits legally under a supervisory framework limited to loan and capital control, Aruba is being pushed to accept a supervision that penetrates right into the veins of its management via internal budgetary policy (LAft/LWHO). This comparison, exposed from Curaçao’s own perspective, provides a critical viewpoint and a clear warning about the constitutional path Aruba is walking.