IC meeting was in keeping with
rules, regulations, says Richards
PHILIPSBURG--The Island Council meeting Monday was conducted in keeping with the rules and regulations governing the Island Territory of St. Maarten. The chairman of the meeting is duty-bound to adhere to these regulations, Lt. Governor Franklyn Richards stated during a press briefing yesterday.
He said he believed it was important for the sake of clarity and transparency to address the many questions arising from the Island Council meeting of Monday, June 9, particularly as they pertained to the agenda point regarding the TelEm N.V. donation to The Sky is the Limit Foundation.
Richards said the Islands Regulation Netherlands Antilles ERNA stipulated that in principle, results of voting were deemed null and void when those casting votes did not represent more than half of the Island Council members. As the Island Council of St. Maarten comprises 11 members, this means that at least six Island Council members must have cast their votes, irrespective of the number of members who were actually present for the meeting.
Richards said a motion had been presented during the meeting, to be voted on. For this vote, only seven persons were eligible to vote because the agenda point related to one of the members of the Council.
“Article 38 of the Islands Regulation regulates this situation. While the member, in this case Commissioner Maria Buncamper-Molanus, was allowed to debate the agenda point, she was not allowed to vote on the motion because article 38 prescribes that members cannot vote on issues that relate to them personally or to their spouse or blood relatives up to the third degree,” Richards said.
He said article 43, which was brought to the attention of the chair by members of the Executive Council during the reading of the motion by the NA faction, stated that a vote was null and void if not more than half of 10 members (as Buncamper-Molanus was not allowed to vote) cast their votes.
In the case of the Island Council meeting of June 9, only five votes were cast and these were in favour of the motion. Two Island Council members did not vote, as they chose to leave the floor of the Council, the Lt. Governor said. “The five votes cast were therefore insufficient for a valid vote result. This means that as a result of the aforementioned situation, the vote was considered null and void as prescribed by article 43 of the Islands Regulation.”
Richards said, however, that article 43 also stated that voting on the motion could take place again in a subsequent meeting. In this case, regardless of the number of Council members who vote, the vote will be valid.
In the event that this new meeting is requested, the normal quorum rules apply. Article 41 of the ERNA stipulates that the meeting is not held when more than half of the Island Council members are not present and have not signed in.
The meeting can take place only when the required quorum is attained. A quorum means that more than half of the members of the Council have to sign in for the meeting. The Island Council of St. Maarten consists of 11 members and a quorum is therefore at least six members.
In the event there is no quorum, another meeting will have to be called. In the event that there is, yet again, no quorum, another meeting will have to be called. That meeting will be convened irrespective of the number of Island Council members present for it.
Richards: “Of course, I cannot say at this time if the motion will be brought back to the floor of the Island Council and what the results thereof could be. But I do wish to point out that in general, a motion of no-confidence against a commissioner can be a first step for a proposal to dismiss the commissioner in question.”
Article 50a of the ERNA, Richards said, stipulates that the Island Council is authorised to dismiss a Commissioner once that Commissioner no longer enjoys the confidence of the Island Council. The latter can be apparent by accepting a motion of no-confidence.
There should be a minimum of 14 days between the moment of withdrawing support for a commissioner and the decision-making on a proposal to dismiss that commissioner. This period is a legal stipulation laid down by the ERNA.
The proposal for dismissal must be motivated and in possession of the Island Council at least eight days prior to the public meeting convened to discuss the matter.
Such meetings must also comply with the usual quorum requirements and the number of council members casting votes must represent more than half of the number of Island Council members to prevent a null and void result. A proposal is approved once a majority of votes cast is in favour of it.
“As chairman of the Island Council, I make a point to stick to the principles of impartiality. I will therefore not be making any statements or offering opinions on the motion or an eventual proposal for dismissal.
“I, however, remain convinced that it is always a good thing when there are transparent rules governing the relationship between the Island Government and government-owned companies. The now much-talked-about corporate governance is of the greatest essence and, as Lt. Governor of the island territory, I have on many occasions drawn attention to this.
“The introduction of a Code of Conduct for government officials remains something of a fundamental nature, as well. A proposal by my office has, six years after its initial presentation, never been handled in the Island Council. Corporate Governance and a Code of Conduct are precisely those initiatives which we need to embrace, with an eye on having unambiguous and transparent rules in place, so as to avoid the kinds of discussions which have now surfaced,” Richards said.
