An Analysis by Fundashon Kòrsou Transparente
On September 28, the right of access to information is recognized worldwide. In Curaçao, this right is enshrined in law. But how does it work in practice when a request about the implementation of the Public Access to Government Information Ordinance (LOB) itself remains unanswered?
Access to information is essential to the functioning of democratic societies. The better-informed people are, the more capable they are of participating and bringing about change. In 2019, the United Nations established the International Day for Universal Access to Information, further underscoring the importance of guaranteeing access to information. For Curaçao, this is an appropriate moment not only to talk about transparency, but above all to examine how it functions in practice.
Curaçao has the National Ordinance on Public Access to Government Information (LOB), which gives anyone the opportunity to request information that has been recorded in documents concerning an administrative matter. Citizens and journalists can use the LOB to gain greater insight into government policy, decision-making, and its implementation. As a result, they are not solely dependent on information that the government itself releases through press statements, press conferences, or official announcements.
The LOB goes beyond responding to information requests. The law also provides for proactive disclosure: the government has an independent responsibility to make certain information about policymaking, preparation, and implementation public on its own initiative. Government transparency is therefore not an abstract legal principle. It enables everyone to monitor and scrutinize the actions of government.
Against this background, Fundashon Kòrsou Transparente (FKT) submitted a request on July 23, 2026, to the Minister of Governance, Planning and Service for information concerning the implementation of the LOB. The request did not concern a specific policy dossier. Rather, FKT wanted to understand how the transparency law itself functions in practice.
Among other things, the foundation requested information on how many LOB requests are submitted annually, how many are granted or denied, the extent to which requests are handled within the statutory decision period, and how often extensions are used. Information was also requested regarding objection and appeal procedures arising from LOB decisions. In addition, FKT sought information about the ministry's capacity and any bottlenecks affecting the timely implementation of the law. The foundation also asked what information the government discloses proactively, how citizens are given access to that information, and to what extent the principle of "open unless there is a reason not to be" forms part of the government's transparency policy.
No response was received.
As a result, on August 24, 2026, FKT sent a follow-up letter to the minister.
In this reminder, the foundation explicitly referred to Article 6 of the LOB, which requires that a decision on a request be made as soon as possible and no later than three weeks after receipt. This period may be extended by a maximum of three additional weeks, provided that the extension is communicated in writing and with reasons before the expiration of the initial period.
In its reminder, FKT noted that it had not yet received any response and once again brought its request to the minister's attention. To date, no response has been received to this reminder either.
This is precisely what makes the situation remarkable.
A request asking whether LOB requests are processed within the statutory deadline remains unanswered itself. A request seeking information about obstacles affecting the timely implementation of the LOB is itself subject to delay. And a request concerning proactive disclosure and a culture of transparency has, even after a written reminder, failed to generate a response.
As a result, this issue is not only about FKT. It touches on a much broader question: what can citizens and journalists reasonably expect from their government when exercising their legal right to information?
After all, a transparency law only acquires real meaning when it functions in practice. Statutory deadlines must have significance. When more time is required, this should be communicated. And where information can be disclosed proactively, citizens should not first have to submit a formal request in order to gain access to it.
For that reason, September 28 is an appropriate moment for reflection. Not only on the existence of the LOB itself, but above all on how it functions. How accessible is our government in practice? Can citizens and journalists genuinely exercise their right to information? And what value does a statutory decision period have when no response is given?
FKT is still awaiting the requested information.
The International Day for Universal Access to Information should therefore not be merely a day on which the importance of transparency is reaffirmed in Curaçao. It should also be an opportunity to assess whether that principle is being meaningfully applied in the day-to-day practice of government.
Because public access begins with answers.
Fundashon Kòrsou Transparente (FKT)