THE HAGUE - The Council of State of the Kingdom believes that the level of Dutch defense spending should not be regulated through a Kingdom Act, as Curaçao, Aruba, and Sint Maarten would gain influence over the budget of the Netherlands in that case. 

This assertion comes from the Advisory Division of the Council in response to an initiative proposal from Members of the Second Chamber Stoffer (SGP), Valstar (VVD), Boswijk (CDA), and Dassen (Volt): 

The initiators aim to establish in a Kingdom Act that two percent of the gross domestic product should be allocated to defense spending. This percentage has been agreed upon by NATO countries. Dutch defense spending has long been below the two percent benchmark. The initiators are concerned about what they refer to as the 'neglected defense organization'. Additionally, the proposal introduces a defense plan to be updated every fifteen years and a defense monitor every four years. 

The proposal is a draft Kingdom Act. The initiators justify this choice by referring, among other things, to Article 3, first paragraph, under a, of the Statute, which states that the maintenance of independence and the defense of the Kingdom are matters of the Kingdom. They also point to Article 97, first paragraph, of the Constitution, which prescribes that the armed forces have the task of defending and protecting the Kingdom and its interests.

According to the explanation, the Statute and Constitution make it clear that not each of the four countries individually, but the Kingdom as a whole, is responsible for maintaining an armed force for the entire Kingdom and for the defense of the entire Kingdom. From this perspective, the initiators argue that a Kingdom Act is appropriate. 

They further note that the Caribbean parts of the Kingdom are not subject to the NATO treaty or the EU defense cooperation. Therefore, a proper defense of the territory is of great importance to the three Caribbean countries, according to the explanation. Lastly, the explanation refers to Article 35, second paragraph, of the Statute, which stipulates that the Council of Ministers of the Kingdom decides on the contributions that the four countries make to the maintenance of independence and the defense of the Kingdom. According to the initiators, this implies that a legal arrangement aiming to establish a long-term foundation for defense investments should take the form of a Kingdom Act. 

In this regard, the Division agrees that the maintenance of independence and the defense of the Kingdom are matters of the Kingdom according to the Statute. However, the Kingdom has one unified armed forces, over which the government exercises supreme authority according to the Constitution. The countries Aruba, Curaçao, and Sint Maarten do not have authority over the armed forces themselves and do not possess their own individual armed forces. 

There is no budget for the Kingdom as a whole. The armed forces are funded from the annual budget of the Ministry of Defense. This budget is managed by the country Netherlands and funded from the general resources of the country Netherlands. Although Aruba, Curaçao, and Sint Maarten contribute to the costs of the armed forces, they do so based on the Statute in proportion to their capacity, and only to the extent that it benefits the Caribbean countries. 

Article 105 of the Constitution prescribes that the budget should not be established by Kingdom Act. The important role of the parliament in this matter is enshrined by incorporating budgets into the legislative cycle. In this cycle, the position of the parliament as a co-legislator is constitutionally established. The Chambers approve budget laws; the Second Chamber has the right to amend budget laws. By approving a budget law, the government is authorized to carry out the expenditures included in the budget. This constitutes the core of the so-called budgetary authority. 

In this context, the Division points out that by shaping the present proposal as a Kingdom Act, the countries Aruba, Curaçao, and Sint Maarten would gain influence over Dutch budget legislation. They are formally involved in the establishment and modification of Kingdom Acts. Since a Kingdom Act cannot be amended by ordinary law, the Dutch parliament cannot effectively exercise its budgetary authority. As such, contrary to what the explanation suggests, this constitutes an infringement on the constitutionally enshrined budgetary authority of the Dutch parliament. 

The Division advises against giving the proposal the form of a Kingdom Act, at the very least.