Wever-Croes(MEP) raises three constitutional objections to HOFA

ORANJESTAD – MEP parliamentary leader Evelyn Wever-Croes says a legal analysis prepared by two Dutch constitutional law professors raises serious concerns about the proposed Kingdom Act HOFA. According to Wever-Croes, the study identifies three key constitutional issues that undermine the legislation.

First, she argues that HOFA's financial supervision is not legally guaranteed to be temporary. Although presented as a temporary measure, Aruba has no legal authority to end the supervision, as the final decision rests with the Kingdom Council of Ministers.

Second, she claims Article 38 conflicts with the constitutional framework of the Kingdom by granting powers to the Kingdom Council of Ministers that, according to the legal analysis, exceed its constitutional role. She warned this could create a precedent for greater intervention in Aruba's autonomous affairs.

Third, Wever-Croes questions whether the required consensus behind the Kingdom Act was truly voluntary. The analysis argues that Aruba negotiated under financial pressure and that agreements signed by a previous government cannot bind future governments or Parliament.

She concluded that these legal and academic findings should play a central role in Parliament's debate, warning that approving HOFA in its current form could weaken Aruba's autonomy, constitutional order, and democratic legitimacy.