URGENT CALL FOR CYBERSECURITY TASKFORCE

On Friday, 12 May 2017, a large cyber-attack referred to as WannaCry infected over 230,000 computers in 150 countries around the world. The attack has been described by experts as unprecedented in scale. A preliminary tally shows that WannaCry has affected among others Telefónica in Spain, the British National Health Service, Russia’s Ministry of the Interior, FedEX and France’s Renault auto industry. It is expected that by Monday morning many more companies and institutions will notice that they have been attacked as the work computers are turned on.

Unfortunately, there is a view that somehow we are immune or unlikely to be of interest to cyber criminals. However, when we consider the large amounts of money transferred through our financial institutions, the sensitive documents held in the offices of lawyers, doctors, pharmacies, notaries public and even information pertaining to the pending negotiations regarding the future of our refinery, the dangers of cybercrime suddenly become clear. While no one I have talked to has addimitted being a victim of cybercrime, experience tells us that because of the perceived reputational damage, there are ample or no reports of the existence of cyber-attacks. In an evaluation published last year by the Inter-American Development Bank, the vulnerability of the Latin America and Caribbean region is painfully highlighted. See https://publications.iadb.org/bitstream/handle/11319/7449/Cybersecurity-Are-We-Prepared-in-Latin-America-and-the-Caribbean.pdf?sequence=1

We have a small window in which to develop strong and integrated cybersecurity networks before attackers begin infiltrating. Government has to form a Taskforce to respond to attacks and provide a framework for cybersecurity. Regarding the legal environment, Government and Parliament have to review our criminal code to more effectively fight this type of crime. Existing legislation needs to be reviewed and new laws need to be drafted. We need to create more awareness regarding the consequences of cyber-attacks for our daily lives (ATMs that could be rendered inactive, air trafic control that could be disrupted, the Tax Department, the hospital, Aqualectra that could be compromised). The need for technical infrastructure and capacity building to prevent these attacks is vital as is the awareness that we by ourselves cannot adequately deal with these challenges. We need to engage in regional and international coordination. I strongly suggest this point to be included in the next IPKO (Meeting of the Parliaments of the countries of the Kingdom of The Netherlands). Time is not on our side.

MESTER FIHA INTERES MAKSIMO RIBA FIANANSA

E problema di debe ta un prekupashon grandi pa hopi hende ku ta fia plaka. Esaki ta e kaso pasombra tin un kantidat grandi di hende den e merkado di fianansa, legal i ilegal, ku ta fia plaka ku interesnan ekshorbitantemente haltu. For di 2013 mi a bati alarma den un karta pa Banko Sentral den kua e a pidi atenshon i regla pa loke ta trata mas trasparensha di e kondishonnan di fiansa di plaka, regla pa propaganda pa fia plaka i spesialmente e haltura di interes, ku den kaso ekstremo ta yega te 3500% manera un estudio di Banko Sentral mes a konstatá na 2015. E interesnan haltu aki ta kondusí na situashonnan sosial desastroso pa hopi hende i famia. Atrobe mi a keda aserká pa hendenan ku ta sklama pa un solushon. Hendenan ku ta den un sírkulo visioso di debe ku nan no por sali afó kondusiendo na kiebro di famia, bendementu di nan poseshonnan na findishi i hasta a pusha hende den prostitushon. Den su karta pa Banko Sentral (aki bou) mi ta pidi pa urgentemente establesé pa lei, manera ta e kaso den hopi pais, inkluso Boneiru, un interes máksimo ku por kobra pa un fiansa.

 

WETTELIJKE MAXIMALE RENTE OP LENINGEN

De shuldenproblematiek is mede door het groot aantal kredietverstrekkers die actief zijn in de sector een monster geworden voor duizenden mensen en gezinnen op Curaçao. Reeds in 2013 heb ik aan de bel getrokken en pleit wederom voor meer regels met betrekking tot transparantie van leningen, reclamespotjes voor leningen en kredietwaardigheid van mensen die een lening aanvragen en vooral de ‘loan sharks’ die krediet verstrekken tegen woekerrente, soms zelfs 3,500%, aan mensen die niet kunnen terugbetalen. Deze schuldenproblematiek leidt tot sociale ellende op ons eiland. Ik ben weer benaderd door mensen die hun schulden niet kunnen terugbetalen, die hierdoor relationele problemen ondervinden of die bijvoorbeeld uit hun huis moeten als gevolg van schulden of zelfs in de prostitutie terechtkomen. In mijn brief aan de Centrale Bank (hieronder) stel ik ook dat er dringend een wettelijke maximale rente voor leningen moet worden bepaald.

8 May, 2017

The President of the Centrale Bank

van Curaçao en Sint Maarten

Dr. E.D. Tromp

Simon Bolivarplein 1

Curaçao

Re: Responsible consumer lending

Dear Dr. Tromp:

With reference to my letter of April 3, 2013 regarding my concern about irresponsible consumer lending and your response on April 25, 2013, I wish to inform you as follows.

In 2015 the Central Bank conducted an interesting study on small consumer lending and concluded that there is a dire need of strengthening policies that protect the interest of consumers of financial products and services. Your study also brought home the undesirable financial and social consequences of ‘loan sharks’ and their exorbitant interest rates of up to thousands of percent.

As I did I in 2015, I am urging you to use all the instruments at your disposal to protect consumers of financial products and services, especially by setting a maximum legal interest rate chargeable on a loan. Postponing concrete action will contribute to even more financial and social catastrophe trapping too many people in a nightmare circle of debt they cannot escape.

Sincerely,

Alex D. Rosaria

---

KORTE TA SALBANDO NOS DEMOKRASIA

E último añanan a keda demostrá kon agradesido nos mester ta ku nos poder hudisial aki na Kòrsou. E no ta perfekto, pero por bisa – i pa ami ku sierto bergwensa – ku e ta é poder di nos trias politica ku mihó ta funshoná na nos bienestar general. Ku e kasonan den (i pendiente pa bai ) Korte, nos ta konkluí ku tantu e podernan legislativo (Parlamento), pero prinsipalmente e poder ehekutivo (Gobièrnu) a faya.
P’esei no por ta un sorpresa ku tin gruponan ligá ku mafia ku ya kaba ta bon penetrá i representá den Gobièrnu i Parlamento, ta hasi tur lokual ta posibel pa debilitá, susha i asta eliminá e sistema di Korte ku nos tin aktualmente. Nos por a tuma nota den e veredikto di Korte den Promé Instansia den e kaso di Babel, ku un casique di mafia na Italia ta lanta un partido polítiko aki na Kòrsou i pone su pòpchinan den Staten, Gobièrnu i instanshanan (semi) gubernamental pa asina sirbi e interesnan aya na Italia. E gruponan ligá ku mafia aki, huntu ku sierto partidonan polítiko ku ta sirbi interes di mafia te ainda, danki Dios, no a haña e manera pa tòrnu na nos poder hudisial. I komo pais, nos mester hasi tur lokual ta posibel pa esaki no sosdé.
Lagami remarká ku un pais nunka ta bai dilanti si solamente un (1) di e tres (3) patanan di su demokrasia ta funshoná. Pero, pa awor, ta nos poder hudisial ta skapa nos te ainda ku nos no a kai den e abismo di diktatura. Nos mester ta vigilante sinembargo pa e podernan ku ta skonde tras di independensia, pa asina kamuflá nan intenshonnan real. Esakinan ta entre otro kibra nos sistema hudisial meskos ku ta hasiendo ku Gobièrnu i Parlamentu. E gruponan aki lo no ke nada otro ku someté nos poder hudisial na mafia pa asina ei reina impunidat riba nos isla pa krimen, labamentu di plaka, froude di belasting i finansiamentu di terorismo. No ta un koinsidensia ku ta e mesun gruponan aki ta(bata) kontra di mas lei pa protehá nos sistema finansiero i medidadanan internashonal di sanshon.
Mi ta kere ku den e situashon aktual na promé lugá nos mester kuida nos poder hudisial. Mester renfors’é ku mas presupuesto, hende i ekipo. Den e kuadro aki nos mester di (mas) sosten i koperashon den Reino. Na di dos lugá nos mester ban traha duru pa krea konsientisashon den pueblo ku no ta kumbiní sigui sostené mafia. Pakiko? Pasombra na di promé lugá e pòpchinan ku mi a menshoná anteriormente no ta traha pa bo, nan ta traha pa mafia. Pues ora sierto partido parti stof, serbes ku kuminda, zundra Makamba i grita independensia, realisá ku esaki ta pa garantisá ku mafia i korupshon por sigui reina. I realisá ku no ta eksistí ningun pais ku a prosperá via korupshon. Realisá ku ningun pais a resolvé su problema di pobresa via mafia. Nos por kambia e rumbo aki ku nos voto 28 di aprel awor. Mientras tantu, ami ta gradesido i orguyoso di e trabou di nos Korte na fabor di nos demokrasia.

70 JAAR VERTEGENWOORDIGING IN DEN HAAG

Dit jaar herdenken wij dat Curaçao 70 jaar geleden voor het eerst een eigen vertegenwoordiger in Den Haag, de voorloper van de huidige positie van Gevolmachtigde minister, kreeg.
De Staten van Curaçao hebben na de Tweede Wereldoorlog herhaaldelijk het verlangen geuit voor een eigen vertegenwoordiging in Den Haag om nauwere banden tussen Curaçao en Nederland aan te halen. Het belangrijkste struikelblok om dit te realiseren was het feit dat de contact tussen het bestuur in Nederland en Curaçao tot op dat moment altijd plaatsvond via de Gouverneur van Curaçao. Vele vragen rezen dus; van diepe staatsrechtelijke kwesties tot de juiste titulatuur van de nieuwe functionaris: Gezant? Afgevaardigde? Of Excellentie?
Na uitvoerige bespreking tussen december 1946 en maart 1947 over de positie van de vertegenwoordiger, besloot Gouverneur Kasteel mr. dr. Moises Frumencio da Costa Gomez, Statenlid van de Curaçaosche Roomsch Katholieke Partij te benoemen om Curaçao in Nederland te vertegenwoordigen. Volgens de notulen van de vergadering van de Staten op 24 januari 1947, werd besloten dat van de drie kandidaten (da Costa Gomez, Kwartsz en Statius Muller), da Costa Gomez ” [..] den besten persoon dien wij ons kunnen voorstellen om ons te vertegenwoordigen”. Volgens het ANP arriveerde dr. M. F. Da Costa Gomez met zijn gezin op vrijdag 18 april 1947 met de Noordam. De heer da Costa Gomez verklaarde tegenover de Nederlandse pers dat men in Curaçao zeer ongeduldig was ten aanzien van de aan te brengen staatkundige hervormingen. Hij uitte de hoop als vertegenwoordiger van Curaçao zijn bijdrage te leveren. Hiermee was tevens het giswerk over zijn titulatuur verdwenen. Zowel op de zes eilanden als in Nederland werd hij als zodanig genoemd, de Vertegenwoordiger van Curaçao. De duidelijkheid omtrent zijn titulatuur verschafte echter geen helderheid over zijn positie, staatsrechtelijk gezien. Dr. M. F. Da Costa Gomez neemt zijn ontslag als zodanig aangezien hij volgens de Surinaamse krant de Waarheid dd. 1 juni 1948 van oordeel is dat de nieuwe wet op de staatsregeling van Curaçao niet duidelijk inhoudt, dat zijn post als vertegenwoordiger op de bestaande voet kan worden gehandhaafd. Dr. da Costa Gomez heeft in twee telegrammen zijn ontslag als zodanig toegelicht. In het eerste telegram aan de Gouverneur wees hij erop, dat hij deze functie niet meer nodig achtte in de nieuwe structuur. In het tweede telegram aan de Staten bracht hij zijn dank uit voor het in hem gesteld vertrouwen, maar weigerde toch „beleefd” deze kandidatuur wegens gemis aan medewerking in het belang van de constructieve opbouw van Curaçao, welke naar zijn mening was vertraagd wegens gebrek aan tijdige voorlichting door toedoen van de Curaçaose autoriteiten. Achter deze diplomatieke taal schuilde echter da Costa Gomez’s diepe zorg dat de Democratische Partij van Curaçao de verwezenlijking van de autonomie aan het dwarsbomen en vertragen was. Eerder in eind november 1947 ging da Costa Gomez reeds hals over kop naar Willemstad om door het aanwenden van zijn persoonlijke invloed de moeilijkheden en oppositie tegen de Ronde-tafel conferentie te overwinnen. Hij vond dat de verwezenlijking van zijn levenswerk, de autonomie, beter gediend zou zijn indien hij in Willemstad was. Da Costa Gomez vertrekt op 17 juni 1948 uit Nederland op weg naar Curaçao. Eenmaal op Curaçao licht hij zijn beslissing als volgt toe tegenover Het Algemeen Dagblad dd. 21 juni 1948: “Om vruchtbaarder werk in Curaçao te kunnen verrichten, heb ik gemeend mijn mandaat ter beschikking te moeten stellen. De ervaring immers heeft geleerd, dat schriftelijke gedachtenwisseling inzake fijne nuances der wetgeving doorgaans tot misverstand aanleiding geven. Daar ik van mening ben, dat rustige besprekingen, in het belang van Curaçao geacht moeten worden, heb ik gemeend ontslag te moeten nemen, daar mijn betrekking daarvoor geen belemmering mag zijn”.
De heer Michael “Maike” Gorsira, voorheen hoofdinspecteur van politie wordt later benoemd tot vertegenwoordiger van Curaçao in Nederland in de plaats van mr. dr. da Costa Gomez. Hij vertrok op 3 december 1948 naar Nederland om in zijn nieuwe functie werkzaam te zijn. Reeds in 1949 moet Gorsira plaats maken voor een nieuwe vertegenwoordiger, de heer Matthias Bartels Daal. Gorsira werd in de eerste helft van 1949 kandidaat gesteld door de oppositie en Bartels Daal door de coalitie. Nadat de stemmen tot tweemaal toe gestaakt hadden, besliste het lot. De heer Bartels Daal was hoofd van het bevolkingsbureau op Curaçao.

DEKLARASHON DI BANKAROTA TA ROBES I MALIGNO

Un polítiko o mandatario di buena fe sa ku ora su pais ta bankarota esei kiermen ku no por paga pa importashon di merkansia i servisio, ku plaka den sirkulashon ta bira skars, ku e sistema bankario komersial ta kai den otro i finalmente ta yega na un situashon ku no tin konfiansa, ku gobièrnu no por paga su debenan (kompletamente). Pues un situashon sumamente penoso ku tin konsekuensia pa bo presupuesto, balansa di pago, ekonomia i empleo kondusiendo na fuga di kapital i prinsipalmente deterioro di e situashon sosial. Nos pais no ta bankarota. Ta remarkabel kon e arkitéktonan di “voodoo finance” a ninga ku nos tabata den un debakel finansiero ku a kondusí na un ‘aanwijzing’ di Ulanda na 2012, pero ku awor ta grita ku nos ta bankarota, miéntras nos no ta. Tambe ta normal ku un polítiko o mandatario di buena fe ta bringa pa su pais no keda deklará bankarota loke normalmente ta keda hasí dor di instanshanan internashonal i independiente manera Standard and Poor Moody’s i IMF. Aki, sin aparente sosten di Banko Sentral, Ministerio di Finansa, CFT i sektor privá ni institutonan internashonal, e Promé minister temporal ta sali deklará nos pais bankarota. Ta masha importante pa Staten den un reunion urgente yama tantu e Promé minister i minister di Finansa temporal, pa nan bin splika nos situashon. Ta importante ku ta tende opinion di entre otro nos ekspertonan finansiero di Banko Sentral, CFT, Ministerio di Finansa i tambe e Asosashon di Bankeronan Komersial. Tambe ta importante pa nos traha i yega na un ofensiva pa informá internasionalmente kiko a i ta pasa na Kòrsou. No por tin duda ku e lokual e minister a sali bisa ta devastador pa nos klima di invershon i desaroyo sosio-ekómiko, prinsipalmente pa e hòmber humilde ku ya kaba tin’e difísil. Atrobe nos ta mira kon devastador ta ora bo laga finansa den man di hendenan ku sa tiki di e materia aki.

 

1 APREL 2017: 80 AÑA DERECHI PA NOS MES ELEKSHON

Inkapasidat, falta di madures di algun polítiko ta pone

ku awe nos pais a pèrdè un drechi atkerí 80 aña pasá

Despues di un lucha largu i tenás, riba 1 aprel 1937, 80 aña pasá, nos pais pa promé biaha a haña e derechi pa nos mes organisá nos elekshon di Staten. Na 1937 por a skohe solamente 10 (6 pa Kòrsou, 2 pa Aruba, 1 pa Boneiru i 1 pa Islanan Ariba) di e total di 15 miembronan di Staten. No ta tur hende por a vota; esei lo a keda reglá den e Kiesreglement di 1948. E logro di 1937 ta signifikante sinembargo pasombra mientras Ulanda a duna Sürnam e derechi aki for di 1864, nos no a hañ’é pasombra tabata konsiderá nos ‘no madurá’ pa e responsabilidad aki. Pa 80 aña nos tin pues e derechi pa nos mes organisá nos elekshon. Awe sinembargo nos a pèrd’é pasombra polítikonan na mando a demostrá di no tin madures pa atendé ku demokrasia i nos institutonan demokrátiko.

E prinsipal aktornan ku a hiba e lucha ya menshoná tabata Généreux Jacob Richard de Lima (for di 1869), Abraham Mendez Chumaceiro (for di 1895) i Moises Frumencio da Costa Gomez (for di 1935). Den nan kaminda nan a topa banda di resistensia di Ulanda, tambe e élite (protestant) blanku aki na Kòrsou, entre otro Johannes Hamelberg, ku a bisa ku si nos haña derecho di voto nos pais lo bira unu di ‘kanibalismo i paganismo’. Despues di preshon i insistensia a publiká e Curaçaosch Kiesreglement 1937 riba 30 di mart 1937 ku a drenta na vigor riba 1 aprel 1937. Un triúmfo pa demokrasia i outonomia. E promé elekshon pa Staten a tuma lugá riba 22 di desèmber 1937.

Ta interesante pa repasá algun aspekto di e Kiesreglement 1937. Pa bo vota bo mester tabata hende hòmber, residensiá na Kòrsou, di nashonalidat Ulandes, mayó di 25 aña, ku un salario anual mínimo di Naf 1,200.-, sin debe di belasting habrí i minimal 7 aña di enseñansa (uitgebreid lager openbaar of gesubsidieerd bijzonder onderwijs). Asta den kaso ku e persona tabatin e añanan di enseñansa rekerí pero tabata eksistí duda serka e Verkiezingsbureau, mester a pasa un test di ‘verstandelijke ontwikkeling’ serka un komishon instituí pa Gobernadó i enkabesá pa e Inspektor di Enseñansa. Manera a bisa, hende muhé no por a vota, pero e por tabata kandidato i aparesé riba lista (i bira miembro di Staten). Pa kandidatonan pa lista mester a kumpli tambe ku e rekesitonan ku tabata konta pa e votadó. E Kiesreglement no tabata konosé sistema di partido (ounke ku nan tabata eksistí) pero di kandidato. Riba e ‘stembiljet’ e kandidatonan tabata registrá alfabétikamente. E manera di vota mes tabata sumamente kompliká pasombra kada votadó na Kòrsou por a vota pa un máksimo di 6 kandidato. Esun faborito ta haña e number 1 tras di su nòmber; e di dos faborito number 2 i asina te un máksimo di 6. Na Aruba por a vota pa un máksimo pa 2 kandidato. Na Boneiru i Islanan Ariba, por a vota pa un (1) kandidato so. Den kaso di Boneiru i Islanan Ariba, si un kandidato no a haña e mayoria di voto, e Kiesreglement ta preskribí un votashon di nobo denter di no mas ku tres siman despues di e promé votashon.

E medidanan di entrada, pago di belasting i enseñansa a pone ku solamente 40% di e 2,035 hendenan eligibel na Kòrsou pa vota tabata hendenan nasé na Kòrsou. Sobrá tabata hendenan ku nashonalidat Ulandes ku no a nase aki. E korantAmigoe di Curaçao a bisa algun dia despues di publikashon di e Kiesreglement di ta bou di impreshon ku a hasi e Kiesreglement asina kompliká ku e meta pa e elekshonnan bira un frakaso. E mesun korant den su edishon di 15 di òktober 1937 ta bai mas leu pa bisa ku e Kiesreglement a keda trahá “kontra di Yu di Kòrsou i na fabor di otronan”. Gran mayoria di hendenan nasé na Kòrsou tabata katóliko i esnan nasé otro kaminda, no-katóliko, prinsipalmente protestant. E Kiesreglement a trese hopi divishon di religion (i klase) na Kòrsou i e bataya na hopi okashon tabata keda hibá den korant. Un bataya entre di e defensor di katolisismo, Amigoe di Curaçao i Beurs -en Nieuwsberichten ku tabata sostené e banda protestant. 

E elekshon di 22 desèmber 1937 a tuma lugá den tur trankilidat. Asina e Staten a sinta na 1938, mr. dr. Moises Frumensio da Costa Gomez a kuminsá traha pa trese kambio den e Kiesreglement. Pues e Kiesreglement 1937 a sirbi komo lei pa solamente un (1) elekshon. Un Kiesreglement fasinante, imperfekto ku a koroná un gran lucha hibá pa a tatanan di nos demokrasia. Awe nan mester mira kon nan yunan a traishoná e lucha aki, entregando bèk e derecho di organisá nos elekshon e luna aki. Rason pues pa e deklamadó ku a bisa: “demokrasia ta un flor bunita, pero si no dun’é awa i kuido, e ta seka i muri”. 

NO TA ‘NAN KU NAN’, SINO NOS TUR

Palabra ta difísil despues di e asesinatonan ku a tuma lugá ayera na Kòrsou. Mi ta manda kondolensia pa famia i amigunan di e defuntunan. Mi tin hopi doló. Ta normal ku ta puntra unda nos ta bai i ta fásil pa tira falta riba e ‘otro’ sin kuestioná kiko nos a hasi o keda sin hasi ku a hiba nos aki. E kantidat ridíkulamente haltu di asesinato no ta djis un asuntu di violensia di gèng. Sea ku e asesesinatonan di ayera resultá di ta relatá ku gèng òf no, laga nos realisá ku ta un problema ku mester prekupá nos tur komo Yu di Kòrsou. E asesinatonan aki ta kousa un ambiente di miedu ku ta afektá hinter nos komunidat. E ta menasá progreso i tur avanse ku nos a konosé komo pueblo. E ta komprometé e kosnan ku ta hasi Kòrsou un perla den laman i ku ta pone nos bisa ku nos ta oruyoso di ta Yu di Kòrsou. No ta un kuestion di ‘nan ku nan’ pero un asuntu di nos tur. E no ta un problema ku Gobièrnu o un minister di Hustisia so por solushoná. Pa kolmo no ta eksistí un solushon di awe pa mayan.

Ta opvio ku nos mester invertí mas den kuerpo polisial, ekipo, teknologia ‘state-of-the art’ i hende pa ekipá esaki. Mester un protokòl pa pone tur aktor den e kadena hudisial traha i interkambiá inteligensia ku otro. Tin muchu divishon den i entre e diferente aktornan. Posiblemente un ‘team openbare veiligheid’. E kantidat di arma ku ta drenta nos pais mester ta un prioridat. Tampoko por laga e porta ku ta keda drei permitiendo e mesun hendenan drenta prison, sali, bolbe drenta, keda habrí.

Represhon ta importante, pero p’ami e aspekto prinsipal pa restablesé seguridat ta pa duna tur nos yunan speransa i akseso igual na oportunidat pa hiba un bida desente i kontentu. Nos mester krea un komunidat den kua tur hende por sinti ku nan potensial komo individuo i grupo ta alkansabel i ku esaki no ta un soño ku solamente un man yen di hende por realisá.

Nos mester di mas hende ku ta modelo pa nos komunidat. Polítikonan mester realisá ku banda di maneho i ser Parlamentario nan tin un deber ku nos hendenan pa tin un komportashon ku ta inspirá i no un di dekadensia. Religiosonan mester realisá ku si nan mes, hopi biaha ku inpunidat, ta faya ku lei, moral i nan vokashon, nan no por ta un ‘role model’ pa nos komunidat. I meskos ta konta pa nos organisashonnan di deporte, rekreo i soshal kaminda definitamente nos por hasi kosnan mihó. Laga nos ta sinsero i atmití ku nos a krea un isla di ‘nan’ i ‘nos’. Ta p’esei hopi hende den e kasonan di asesinato manera nos a konosé ta papia di ‘nan ku nan’. Mi sa, mi a tende un lider polítiko bisa meskos despues di e dòbel asesinato na Hato. Nos mester traha riba un komunidat di inklushon kaminda nos ta sòru ku no pasombra nos yunan ta bai tal skol, ta biba den tal bario, tin tal tipo di kabei, ta papia tal idioma, tin tal preferensia seksual o ta di tal religion o kredo, nan no ta konta. For di 1954 nos no a hasi sufisiente pa krea un bon sistema di edukashon, programanan soshal, un ekonomia ku ta krese i krea kupo di trabou. Pues laga nos no hunga wega polítiko ku e tragedia aki. I nos komo mayor tin un enorme tarea nos dilanti. Nos ta e piesa sentral. Nos mester ta e ‘role model’ prinsipal pa nos yunan ku nos komportashon i pa krea speransa serka nan. Nos komo mayor mester wak nos mes den spil i koregí nos komportashon. Laga nos hasi’é pa nan. Pa nan futuro. Pa nos pais.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

NO, POPULISM IS NOT DEAD. JUST ASK RUTTE.

A few days before the so-called Brexit referendum I released a press statement to warn against populism in the world, Europe and my own country, Curaçao. Again I want to send a cautionary advice. I do not want to put a damper on all the jubilance around the world after the Dutch election of this week, but let us please do not confuse the results as a defeat of populism. I too want to believe that the Dutch election is going to send a powerful message to the likes of Ms.Marine Le Pen (France) and Mr. Uwe Junge (Germany), both far right populists who face elections later this year. That is simply not the case. Let us understand that populism in The Netherlands was not defeated. Politicians in The Netherlands chose to adopt the popular nationalistic language and radical anti-Islamic ideas of Geert Wilders’ Freedom Party rather than confront these messages.The Dutch Prime Minister, Mr. Mark Rutte, chose his words carefully after his victory condemning the ‘wrong populism’. Let us not overlook the fact that he did not condemn populism in general. So I guess that according to Mr. Rutte there is nothing wrong with his brand of populism. Unfortunately Dutch politicians in general, not only Mr. Rutte, chose to adopt the radical ideas of Mr. Wilders, repackage them and somehow made them look less over the top with the Dutch voters. Also, let us not forget that Mr. Rutte had his own ‘mano de Dios’ moment to help him win the election when the Turkish President, Mr. Recep Tayyip Erdogan, decided to start a spat with The Hague. I guess Mr. Rutte chose to rather join the populists than doing something about them. Fast-forwarding to France, does this mean that Ms. Le Pen does not have a chance in the French presidential election because of what happened in The Netherlands? I do not think France (and Germany) should read too much into what happened in The Netherlands this week. Finally I want to make this point. Not that I agree with him, but Mr. Wilders has been authentic about his intentions to be the savior of the Western World against Islam which according to him is pure evil. Ms. Le Pen is not that principled. She wants power and will likely run and cruise on the right kind of populism. Just like Mr. Rutte.

THE CURAÇAO BRAND USING THE CURAÇAO DIASPORA

Last month, after I had posted a picture of a Chinese pavilion on my Facebook page, an unknown person sent me a message asking me if I was in Taiwan. He recognized the pavilion and knew I took the photo in the Jieshou Park in Taipei, the capital of Taiwan. This person turned out to be a Curaçaoan (a Yu di Kòrsou (YDK) as we refer to ourselves in our language Papiamentu) living in Taiwan. He, together with three more YDKs wanted to meet with me to chat about our island. They were very interested in Curaçao politics, and I felt they were eager to talk to me about some good ideas they had for our island. Unfortunately I had already left Taiwan and was in Vietnam for an assigment. Via social media we maintained contact and I asked him how he felt about getting our diaspora organized in order for meaningful contacts among the diaspora and between the diaspora and the mother country. This idea got met with a lot of enthusiasm.

Before getting to that point, the word diaspora comes from the Greek language. ‘Dia’ meaning all over and ‘sporius’ meaning dispersed. In every day language, diaspora means the community of migrants of a particular country living (permanently) in other countries while aware of their identity and maintaining some kind of connection with the country of origin. The idea of diaspora is not new and a handful of countries, some of them for many centuries,  have made good use of their people living abroad. There is a growing awareness among countries new to this concept, that the diaspora is a treasured resource. Input from the diaspora means ideas, innovation, investments and global networks not available at home. Fact is that in the case Curaçao our diaspora can be an important bridge to knowledge, expertise, innovation beyond what is available via the Kingdom diplomatic missions which, as I have mentioned many times before are not even focused on our island even when they should be. Diaspora means especially ‘brain regain’ and ‘brain exchange’.  Fact is that many of our graduates and brain power live abroad. The message we need to send to our YDKs living abroad and the ones planning to leave the country, is that emigration does not have to be final in the sense of severing ties with Curaçao. We have to realize that many of our emigrants are not coming back because they can’t or simply don’t want to. That is fine with me. In any case we should not try to make them out as some kind of monsters for not returning to our island. Especially our politicians like to play this blaming game. I know, because I witnessed a session in 2007 with students from Curaçao at the Erasmus University where a colleague of mine referred to some students as ‘money mongers” for not wanting to return. We must call on YDKs in the diaspora to help to promote and protect the Brand Curaçao. The very notion of the concept of a nation is being redefined. Because of globalization and interconnectedness today the nation is no longer bounded by our 444 square kilometers of territory. We have according to some sources more than half of our population living outside of Curaçao. We need the input of the Curaçao diaspora in order to realize our potential. In order to achieve this we need a diaspora policy in place. In 2012 I dedicated a chapter of the PAIS (the political party I used to head) program on diaspora. In 2013 I wrote a paper on this matter for a meeting between the Parliaments of Aruba, Curaçao, Sint Maarten and the Netherlands, but there was not enough interest to pursue this initiative. Not having had success then, I am trying another approach. We will not wait on policy, but will take it to the social media to get our diaspora organized. A dedicated Facebook page: ‘Curaçao Diaspora’ will be launched. This must be seen as a first step. It is important that we know where we have YDKs, what they do, what their talens are, how they are connected in their places of residence, what their interests are, and how they want to contribute to our development. We could in the future think about having conferences, papers and a list of priorities such as diversity, democracy, human rights, environment, food and water security and of course economics. Hopefully along the way a policy on diaspora will emerge. In no way I want to have any kind of monopoly in this process. Let’s hope it grows. Let’s hope we all feel like the owners of this initiative. Let’s do it for the the Curaçao Brand. I am convinced this could be the start of something wonderful. Thank you YDKs in Taiwan.

WOMEN’S RIGHTS: THE BATTLE IS IN OUR HOMES

You don’t have to be a woman to be for women’s rights. Neither do you have to be a woman to see that there is something intrinsically wrong with the statement that ‘women’s rights have led to moral decay in our homes and country’. If anything this movement is a challenge to the unequal social structure that subjugates and discriminates women. Promoting gender equality, any kind of equality for that matter, can never be morally destructive. Today on International Women’s Day (IWD) it is important to commemorate the enormous gains we have made. These gains are however neither equally distributed globally, nor have they made us come close to ending gender discrimination.

Female genital mutilation, child marriage, honor killings, domestic abuse, lack of equality under the law are all issues that make girls and women all over the world suffer. Women’s rights cannot be only about our own situation back home. Even if these above-mentioned issues may be considered a ‘far-from-my-bed show’, women’s organizations everywhere should make women’s rights a global issue. Without women’s rights around the world, there is no global well-being.

In the workplace women’s rights have played an important role to lessen gender discrimination. I admit however that women more than often work more than men, yet are paid less. Consequently women and girls are more often the face of poverty; they are disproportionately financially dependent on others and are unfortunately more unhealthy than their male counterparts. Fact remains that women’s rights have seen more progress in the workplace. Lacking unfortunately is progress in our homes. Women’s rights and roles at home have not moved in step with changes in the workplace. Too many women and girls are denied social contacts outside of the home, they suffer domestic and sexual abuse and are too often prevented from making personal choices in their private lives. If we want to make changes in the lives of women and girls, we should not stop at labor issues. It should be in the first place at home. And I can honestly say that we have steered away from this issue for too long. No wonder there are so many people who are blaming women’s progress at work for all kinds of societal problems and using this as a poor excuse to deny women and girls the same betterment at home as has been the case in the workplace. This is unacceptable. It should become clear that the women’s movement is not about women who want to be like men. It’s about equal opportunity so that all genders have more options in life and that they can freely make their own choices in order to live full and productive lives. Regarding women’s rights, the battle on the workforce is progressing. In our homes, it’s another ballgame.