WILLEMSTAD – Opposition party PAR has launched a strong attack on Curaçao's governing coalition, accusing its parliamentary members of attempting to shield a former Minister of Finance from accountability over the controversial decision involving XCG 3.2 billion in outstanding tax assessments.
In a sharply worded statement dated October 14, PAR parliamentary leader Quincy Girigorie said the affair represents one of the most serious tests of Curaçao's democratic institutions in recent years.
His criticism follows an October 7 parliamentary committee meeting during which the Court of Audit reportedly reaffirmed that a September 2024 parliamentary motion could not provide legal authorization for the former minister's disputed decision.
Girigorie argues that rather than exercising their constitutional responsibility to scrutinize government actions, coalition parliamentarians attempted to justify a decision that lacked a proper legal foundation.
According to PAR, the parliamentary motion of September 24, 2024, was an unsuccessful attempt to retroactively legitimize the former minister's actions.
The Court of Audit reportedly confirmed that the motion had no legal effect, leaving the original legal concerns unresolved.
For Girigorie, the issue extends beyond the disputed tax decision itself. He believes the handling of the affair demonstrates a broader failure of political accountability.
The PAR leader accused coalition members of choosing political protection over their responsibility to hold government officials accountable.
He described the situation as evidence that Curaçao's democracy continues to face serious pressure.
PAR is also questioning the role of the Public Prosecutor's Office.
In its statement, the party claims that the matter has been awaiting a prosecutorial decision for approximately three years and criticizes what it considers a lack of decisive action.
Girigorie wants to know which institution will ultimately assume responsibility for ensuring that the disputed decision has consequences under the rule of law.
The party's criticism places attention on the respective responsibilities of Parliament, the government, independent oversight institutions, and the Public Prosecutor's Office.
While the Court of Audit can identify irregularities and assess compliance with financial and legal requirements, questions concerning possible criminal responsibility fall within the authority of the competent investigative and prosecutorial institutions.
PAR's statement does not establish that criminal offenses were committed, nor does it provide information about the current status of any prosecutorial investigation.
The party nevertheless argues that the absence of a clear resolution undermines public confidence in government accountability.
Girigorie also questions what lessons Curaçao's political institutions will draw from the controversy.
The dispute centers on approximately XCG 3.2 billion in outstanding tax assessments. Although PAR describes the decision as having cost the country that amount, the actual financial impact would depend on factors including the legal validity and collectibility of the assessments.
For PAR, the central issue is whether a ministerial decision found to lack legal authority can remain without meaningful consequences, particularly when Parliament itself attempted to provide political approval after the fact.
The opposition party maintains that the affair must not be allowed to disappear without a clear explanation of the legal and institutional responsibilities involved.