THE HAGUE – The District Court of The Hague has rejected an attempt by the Curaçao government to terminate the employment contract of an employee of the Curaçao House in the Netherlands who is the brother of the former Minister Plenipotentiary. The court found that none of the grounds presented by the government were sufficient to justify dismissal.
The employee joined the Cabinet of the Minister Plenipotentiary of Curaçao (KGMC), commonly known as the Curaçao House, in July 2021. His brother had been sworn in as Minister Plenipotentiary several weeks earlier. The employee initially received a contract linked to his brother’s term in office, but in July 2024 his employment was converted into a permanent contract.
The employment relationship deteriorated following a staff meeting in March 2025. According to the ruling, the employee raised allegations concerning his brother’s conduct as Minister Plenipotentiary and referred to an audio recording in which the owner of a taxi company allegedly spoke about surrendering 20 percent of his income. The employee later said he possessed three recordings.
The Curaçao House suspended him from his duties as of September 1, 2025, while an internal investigation was conducted. Among other things, management accused him of making serious allegations about the Minister Plenipotentiary, contributing to unrest within the organization and creating a serious employment conflict.
The case subsequently became intertwined with a broader investigation into the Curaçao House. In December 2025, the Curaçao Parliament adopted a motion requesting the General Audit Chamber of Curaçao to investigate the integrity, legality and efficiency of financial management at the Curaçao House and the conduct of the Minister Plenipotentiary between 2022 and 2025. The former minister stepped down on January 12, 2026.
The Dutch court noted that the Audit Chamber has been investigating the former minister’s actions since April 2026, including the issue involving the taxi company. That investigation had not yet been completed when the employment case was heard.
As a result, the judge said it has not been established whether the former Minister Plenipotentiary actually received money from the taxi company. The outcome is relevant because, if the employee’s allegation turns out to be substantially correct, making the allegation cannot automatically be considered culpable conduct.
The court also found that the Curaçao House did not have a formally established procedure through which employees could report serious allegations or suspected wrongdoing. Under those circumstances, the fact that the employee raised his concerns during a staff meeting was insufficient by itself to justify dismissal.
The Curaçao House also argued that the audio recordings eventually circulated outside the organization and reached Curaçao parliamentarians before becoming public. However, the court found there was insufficient evidence to establish that the employee was responsible for distributing them.
Other allegations concerned outside business activities and the employee’s use of the official residence of the Minister Plenipotentiary. The court found that he technically violated a contractual provision concerning outside work because there was insufficient evidence that he had received authorization from Curaçao as his employer. However, the violation was not serious enough to justify termination, and the government failed to sufficiently demonstrate an actual conflict of interest or improper financial benefit.
Regarding the official residence, the employee said he stayed there at the invitation of his brother, who was then Minister Plenipotentiary. The court ruled that he could in principle assume that such an invitation from the organization’s highest-ranking official was permitted. Responsibility for determining whether the invitation was appropriate rested with the former minister, not the employee.
The government additionally argued that the employment relationship had become irreparably damaged. The judge disagreed, saying the Curaçao House had not sufficiently demonstrated a serious and permanent breakdown in relations with colleagues or management. With a new Minister Plenipotentiary now in office, the court saw no reason why the employee could not make a fresh start.
The court also criticized the lack of sufficient efforts to repair the employment relationship after the employee declared himself fit to return to work in April. According to the ruling, constructive discussions or mediation could have been attempted.
Ultimately, the court concluded that there was no sufficient basis for dismissal based on culpable conduct, a permanently damaged employment relationship, inadequate performance or a combination of those grounds.
The Curaçao government’s request to terminate the contract was therefore denied. The Curaçao House was also ordered to pay €1,009 in legal costs. The ruling was issued on September 2 and published on September 3, 2026.