Some political billboards.
PHILIPSBURG--Several political parties have firmly condemned government’s unilateral decision to cancel all public political meetings leading up to the August 19 snap elections.
Soualiga Action Movement (SAM), United People’s Party (UP) and National Alliance (NA) expressed their grave disappointment with the decision in separate press releases issued on Wednesday following the announcement by Prime Minister Dr. Luc Mercelina.
SAM said that although the party respects the rule of law, it finds it “deeply troubling” that the Prime Minister made “this unilateral decision” without consulting with leaders of all the political parties involved in the upcoming snap election.
SAM said it acknowledges that the Prime Minister might possess information unavailable to other parties and the public, but it hopes this is not an attempt at voter suppression.
“Given that two other political parties and SAM itself had planned public meetings, while other parties, notably those in the current governing coalition, chose not to, SAM perceives a significant bias in this decision. SAM also criticised the Prime Minister for irresponsibly raising the island’s threat level without adequately informing political parties or citizens about the reasons behind such drastic measures,” SAM said in its press statement.
“Consultation with all relevant stakeholders, particularly in a political context, brings numerous benefits. It fosters a sense of inclusivity and transparency, ensuring that diverse perspectives are considered in decision-making processes. This collaborative approach can lead to more well-rounded and balanced decisions, as it allows for the identification and mitigation of potential issues that may not be apparent from a single viewpoint.”
The party also said, “Consulting with political parties and other groups can build trust and legitimacy, reducing the likelihood of public dissent and fostering a more united community response. In this situation, involving all political leaders in discussions about public safety measures would not only enhance the perceived fairness of the decision but also ensure that the actions taken are in the best interest of the entire population.”
SAM called on Mercelina to provide a more detailed explanation for “these stringent actions.”
UP
In its release, UP called the move “a grave affront to democratic principles and the fundamental rights of the people.” It said consultations hid not occurred with, amongst others, the VDSM and the police. UP said “this authoritarian move,” particularly following the recent shooting incident, raises serious concerns about the Prime Minister’s motives and the integrity of the country’s democratic process.
“Dr. Mercelina’s decision to cancel public political gatherings without declaring a state of emergency or providing a valid legal basis directly violates the constitutional right to assembly. The Prime Minister has failed to justify this drastic measure, especially when political parties had already secured permits for such meetings and the United People’s Party held its second peaceful and well-attended public meeting without incident less than 48 hours ago.”
UP also said the timing of this decision is highly questionable. “Just days after a high-profile shooting incident, which the Prime Minister himself stated was not politically motivated, he chose to curtail democratic activities. This raises the spectre of political manipulation, especially when his own party is embroiled in controversy with the arrest of a relative linked to the shooting, especially when the United People’s Party has been leading the way with a large majority of the public rallying behind the new leader of the party.”
The party also sees it as a threat to public freedom. “By banning public political meetings, Dr. Mercelina is effectively silencing opposition and preventing citizens from expressing their political beliefs. This move not only stifles free speech but also instils fear among the populace, suggesting that any gathering could be deemed a political threat. This is a slippery slope towards authoritarianism, where fundamental freedoms are sacrificed under the guise of public safety.”
UP said “this dangerous precedent” cannot go unchallenged. “The citizens of St. Maarten have the right to gather, express their political beliefs and hold their leaders accountable without fear of retribution. We call upon the international community, human rights organisations and democratic institutions to condemn this undemocratic action and support the people of St. Maarten in their fight to preserve their democratic rights.
“Prime Minister Mercelina, your actions are not just an overreach; they are a blatant attempt to undermine the democratic fabric of our nation. We stand united against this encroachment on our freedoms and demand the immediate restoration of the right to public assembly. Democracy must prevail, and the will of the people must be respected.”
NA
NA said it was concerned about the ad hoc decision, noting that the decision, taken without any prior consultation with relevant authorities, effectively cancels all public events, meetings, gatherings and even election-day activities at polling stations.
“Such a decision without proper dialogue raises lots of concerns for our faction. Our primary concern is the apparent attempt to instill fear among the people of St. Maarten. If there are legitimate reasons for such drastic measures, it is imperative that all 15 Members of Parliament are included in a thorough discussion to understand the necessity of this decision. Unfortunately, this did not happen. There was no consultation with Members of Parliament, party leaders, the KPSM, the public prosecutor or the VDSM of St Maarten.
“This lack of communication and transparency is unacceptable,” NA said in a press release issued on Wednesday night.
“As representatives of the National Alliance faction, we are calling for an urgent parliamentary meeting to address and discuss this decision. It is fundamentally unfair to deprive the public of their right to make informed decisions through political rallies and gatherings where party manifestos and visions are shared. This abrupt halt to public discourse undermines the democratic process.”
NA said it wants clarity on the duration of the ban on public events. “Is this restriction only until August 20th? Will normalcy return afterward, and will this measure effectively address the concerns of violence and threats toward politicians? These are questions that demand immediate answers.
“We cannot ignore the possibility that this decision might be politically motivated. The National Alliance party had already announced its schedule of public meetings, intending to inform the populace about our plans and the progress left in the pipeline by the National Alliance government. To suddenly awaken to this news raises serious concerns about the safety and transparency of our country’s political environment.”
NA said the Prime Minister had said in a national address about the tragic event that took place last week that there is no evidence that the attack was politically motivated, yet he has taken drastic measures to cancel public political meetings without consulting or informing all party leaders. “If there is a national security threat, the public deserves to know,” NA said.
