There was a noteworthy story in Monday’s paper about Curaçao’s Investor Permit Program to stimulate the economy. Dutch State Secretary of Home Affairs Raymond Knops told the Second Chamber of Parliament that Curaçao cannot unilaterally grant investors citizenship.
That is true because issuing passports of the Netherlands and consequently the European Union (EU) is a kingdom affair. However, what the island provides is legal local residency and it just happens to be that this normally creates the option to apply for naturalisation after five years.
The latter does mean giving up one’s other nationality nowadays, which is why many foreigners prefer waiting 10 years to seek permanent residency. There are other requirements like some basic knowledge of the Dutch language and about the kingdom.
Concern expressed in The Hague was primarily related to the European Committee (EC) recently initiating a procedure against EU-member states Malta and Cyprus for offering “golden passport schemes.” In Curaçao’s case one can get three years’ residency by investing US $260,000, five years plus eligibility for citizenship at the end with $420,000 and an indefinite residence permit with the same possible naturalisation after five years for $838,000.
Although there has been criticism of such regulations for potentially bringing in and legitimising unwanted elements, with today’s international law enforcement networks a proper vetting process can greatly help lower the risk in that sense. Several countries in the region already have one.
In neighbouring St. Kitts and Nevis, for example, the Citizenship By Investment (CBI) was much maligned at times mostly by politicians, but the owner of a major real estate development company in the twin-island federation said only last week that it had a very positive impact. St. Maarten was considering something similar to Curaçao’s, so it will be interesting to see whether the Dutch government takes any counter-steps in this matter, including potential naturalisation restrictions for this specific group.
Whatever they come up with had better be based on non-discriminatory, objective and otherwise reasonable criteria; if not, it could easily result in bunch of lawsuits just waiting to happen.
