New Caledonia pro-independence says indigenous Kanaks omitted from voting roll

New Caledonian party to contact Valls about roll

NEW ZEALAND

New Caledonia's pro-independence Caledonian Union says it will write to the French prime minister to express its surprise that thousands of indigenous Kanak people are missing from the roll of those elIgible to vote in the independence referendum.

The prime minister, Manuel Valls, is due in New Caledonia this week amid political tension and economic uncertainty.

The electoral rolls are highly contentious on a political level while the fall in the price of nickel has shaken the entire sector.

The Caledonian Union's president, Daniel Goa, has told Noumea's daily newspaper that the party doesn't find it normal that 21,000 people have not automatically been put on the list.

A vote is due by 2018 as the conclusion of the 1998 Noumea Accord, which is the territory's decolonisation roadmap.

The roll for the vote is being finalised based on terms which restrict voting rights to long-term residents.

Mr Goa sais a big challenge for his camp would be to mobilise those who habitually abstained from voting, suggesting they number about 46,000 people.

Bonaire Foundation calls on Netherlands to fulfill international decolonisation obligations

Correspondence from James Finies, Foundation Nos Ke Boneiru Bek to the Delegation of the Senate of the Netherlands

Subject: Visit of delegation First Chamber to Caribbean part Kingdom, 16-23 April 2016

Dear Sirs,

In connection with your official travel-work visit to the BES islands on 19, 20 and April 21, 2016, we bring the following to your attention:

Your visit intention is for supplementing and preparation of the parliamentary handling and debate on June 21 a.s. of the evaluations of the new political structure in the Kingdom by October 10, 2010 where you will take your impartial position.

Your task as co-legislator and approval of bills from the Second Chamber is based primarily on the technical aspects, the reliability and consistency with other laws. You have taken your responsibility already earlier on March 21, 2014 to stop, further anchoring, the bill of October 23, 2012 of Constitutional change, until after the evaluation of the constitutional reform.

In addition to administrative and political responses you are particularly interested in the experience of the general population. The fact that political-constitutional structure resorts under higher law of self-determination, and self-determination is a human right which is exclusive of the peoples and not to administrators and politicians should give you enough reason and strength to respect these higher laws, to guarantee, not to violate them but to repair or correction. So your assessment is in this case exclusively on the rights of the people of Bonaire, which has inherited and acquired these rights because of our shared colonial past and your own agreements of the decolonization treaties in the United Nations.

Your Minister of the Interior and Kingdom Relations has also re-confirmed this officially to us: letter dated January 8, 2014, reg.nr # 2014-0000012853: "That the people of Bonaire has the right to let its voice be heard and the right to self-determination, is an hereditary that is not under discussion and is fully endorsed by the Cabinet. "

On December 18, 2015, the legitimate democratic representation of the people of Bonaire, the Island Council, consulted the people of this Bonaire through a referendum. The Bonaire nation could make its voice heard on the "constitutional position of Bonaire" and whether they "agree or are against the implementation of the direct link with the Netherlands as of 10-10-10." The outcome or result leaves no room for mis-interpretations and doubt, having rejected the interpretation of the state structure by 10/10/10, the annexation of the BES islands, Bonaire, as a public council body, "special municipality" in Dutch Constitution under Article 134.

For clarity and correct comparison ,5040 Bonerian vote No, with turnout of 61% voters, and more than 65% No-votes is the same as 6.75 million Dutch in the Netherlands voted against (and that would have caused a revolution in the Netherlands).

It is now very clear that there is no legal basis and reasonable grounds exist to further force the state structure, enforce and impose this against the rights and wishes and voice of the Bonerians people, whom you have made miserable since 10- 10-10 (the same happened to St Eustatius, who also has its voice heard on 17 December 2014). So your current political position goes frontally against international law, against the fundamental principles of our customary international and human rights.

Also, it is now easier for you to take the appropriate lawful decision because it was more difficult before the referendum of December 2015,because although you came to recognize and had agreed that it was illegal, but you kept marching in, because "Bonaire themselves have chosen this." Now it is clear that since 18 December 2015, the population of Bonaire clearly showed: "not to have chosen this themselves."

Briefly, the people of Bonaire, in accordance with international law is the only one with the right to speak out for the determination of their political structure, their future, and because this structure 10-10-10 was temporary for the period of 5 years, and the people of Bonaire made their voice heard on 18 December 2015 and rejected this Illegal state structure and this decision and wishes must be respected by all administrators and politicians of Bonaire and the Netherlands.

Too many to mention, but in addition to all other previous negative studies, demonstrations, protest letters etc, yet an example that you do not like as administrators , government, to have on your conscience and c.v. would like to have. The research of your own Royal Institute of Southeast Asian and Caribbean Studies (KITLV), the question about your Dutch representation and presence in Bonaire, 73% of the Bonerian population are negative about this and that this is primarily by the current constitutional state link and structure.

Finally, we ask you politely but yet urgently your help, to do everything in your ability as soon as possible to begin the dismantling and transfer and repatriation process of your administration because the situation is restrictive among the population.

We would like to continue forward with you in the Kingdom, but under the conditions of the New Kingdom after the 2nd World War, which the Netherlands has agreed with at the United Nations, and you to fulfill your decolonization obligations and guarantees, guarantees and promotes the political freedom and equality of all peoples of the Kingdom, so that we the people of Bonaire, with mutual respect, equal and free, together with you to build a prosperous Kingdom.

Hoping of having informed you sufficiently, we remain awaiting your positive response.

With kind regards
James Finies, 

 Foundation Nos Ke Boneiru Bek

cc/ Bestuur van Openbaar Lichaam Bonaire Eilandsraad van het Openbaar Lichaam Bonaire Leden van de vaste commissie van de 1ste en 2de Kamer. 

Anti-Colonialism Day marked on April 24 across the globe

TeleSur

April 24 mark(ed) World Anti-Colonialism Day and teleSUR English takes a look at the current and former anti-colonial struggles in Latin America and the Caribbean.

On April 24, 1955, 29 “non-aligned” nations from Africa, the Middle East and Asia concluded the historically significant Afro-Asia Conference, or what was more popularly known as the “Bandung Conference,” a landmark event on anti-imperialism, anti-racism, anti-colonialism and anti-militarization in the midst of an escalating Cold War.

Held in Bandung, Indonesia the meeting brought together revolutionaries from around the world, who condemned Western imperialism and colonialism.

April 24 also marks the Easter Rebellion by the Irish people against British rule. The uprising represents a refusal of British imperial rule by Irish revolutionaries who denounced the empire's unfair and oppressive occupation.

READ THE FULL REPORT HERE .

Pro-Puerto Rico Independence group support Bernie Sanders

Independentistas por Bernie Sanders

CLARIDAD

Puerto Rico

Bernie Saunders

Visita la foto galería (1)

    Nos convocamos un grupo de independentistas que hemos decidido participar en las primarias demócratas en Puerto Rico para apoyar la candidatura de Bernie Sanders.  Lo hacemos, aun reconociendo que la celebración de primarias presidenciales en Puerto Rico han sido parte de una estrategia de los partidos coloniales para acercar más a Puerto Rico a la nación norteamericana.  Hacemos una excepción en este momento porque consideramos que vivimos tiempos excepcionales.  

Nunca antes se había  celebrado un proceso eleccionario en Estados Unidos que fuera tan definitorio para la ruta que habrá de tomar ese país en el futuro.  Se enfrentan tres visiones de futuro en esa nación, que es la que controla nuestro destino.  En el lado Republicano se aglutinan las fuerzas más retrógradas, racistas y fascistas de ese país. Por el lado Demócrata se enfrentan dos visiones. Por un lado, el continuismo de las políticas imperiales neoliberales promotoras de la guerra, las intervenciones directas e indirectas en otros países con el fin de apoderarse de sus recursos naturales y controlar sus mercados y el control de los procesos políticos internos por parte de un puñado de millonarios y billonarios; la consolidación de una oligarquía totalitaria. Hillary Clinton representa esos intereses.

Hillary Clinton es la aliada y portavoz de las corporaciones multinacionales, los buitres financieros que ahora exprimen a nuestro pueblo, y el complejo militar-industrial que promueve la guerra en el mundo. Contrario a lo que muchos creen, Hillary Clinton no es amiga de Puerto Rico.  Es la amiga del capital que nos explota.  Es también, la mayor amenaza para la paz del mundo.

Por otro lado está Bernie Sanders quien lleva toda su vida luchando por los derechos humanos, la igualdad racial y de género, defendiendo los derechos de los trabajadores y las minorías, combatiendo la guerra y el intervencionismo, abogando por el fin del bloqueo a Cuba y denunciando el capitalismo salvaje. Además promueve un sistema de salud universal y la educación universitaria gratuita en los colegios y universidades públicas, entre otras cosas.  Se define como socialista democrático y ha aglutinado un amplio movimiento de las fuerzas más progresistas de EEUU. para la acción política concertada que le ayude a implantar su programa desde la Presidencia. 

Con Bernie Sanders en la presidencia de EEUU. nuestro país tendría un interlocutor en la Casa Blanca en disposición de colaborar con P.R. para superar nuestro estancamiento económico y político. 

No participar en estas primarias demócratas, que aunque fueron creadas con otros propósitos, sería desperdiciar una oportunidad única en la historia para contribuir a provocar un cambio positivo en la nación más poderosa del mundo,  un cambio que repercutirá positivamente en nuestro país.

Creemos que el acercamiento del pueblo puertorriqueño con el pueblo trabajador y las capas medias norteamericanas es de naturaleza estratégica para la lucha por la autodeterminación de nuestro país. Este apoyo a la candidatura de Bernie Sanders y al movimiento de masas que aglutina las fuerzas más progresistas de Estados Unidos  a su alrededor, sirve para ampliar nuestras bases de comunicación y coordinación con esos sectores del pueblo norteamericano.

Nosotros exhortamos a los independentistas y a los puertorriqueños de todas las ideologías que residen en Puerto Rico y fuera de nuestro país a que se inscriban, si no están inscritos, para votar en las primarias demócratas por Bernie Sanders. Los instamos a organizar comités y grupos de apoyo en los municipios, comunidades, centros de estudio y de trabajo, a llamar, escribir y exhortar a nuestros compatriotas de la diáspora para que respalden la candidatura de Bernie Sanders. Igualmente los exhortamos a estar presentes en las mesas electorales para proteger los votos que se emitan por su candidatura.

Haciendo camino al andar……..

Comité Coordinador: José Nicolás Medina, Luis Alonso Vega, Flavia Rivera Montero, José Rafael Coss, Yara Nazario Morales, Arlene Bayó, Mindy Hernández, Rubén Colón Morera, Gretchen Feshold, Abel Muñiz, Luis Rodríguez, Nitza Hernández, Roberto Delgado, José Martin Ramos, Nilsa Medina, Santos Rivera Montero, Evelyn Moreno, Rita Molinelli, Celestino Rivera, Norman Pietri, Gabriel Coss.

.

How Europe underdeveloped this part of the Caribbean

"Decolonization" is theme of University of Guam Academic Journal

A Journal of Research & Practice on Education 

in Guam and Micronesia

Current Volume

---

Volume 22, Fall 2015

Purchase this volume

Articles

Comparative Political Development in the United States-administered Pacific Dependencies

Carlyle G. Corbin

Chamoru Self-Determination and the Rhetoric of Both/Neither in United Nations Testimonies

Tiara R. Na'puti

An Appraisal of Self-determination Under International Law

Julian Aguon

Trongkon Niyok - A Symbol of Settlement, Survival, Sustainability and Self-Determination for the People of Guahan

Moñeka De Oro

Identity and Self-determination in Guam: A Chamorro Homeland - An American Colony

Mary Therese F. Cruz

Dies Mit: The Origin and End of Chamorro Self-Determination

Robert A. Underwood

Poetry

ginen fatal impact statements

Craig Santos Perez

Commentary

Estague i Kinahulo' i Manhoben

Kenneth Gofigan Kuper

Testimonies

Statement of the Non-self-governing Territory of Guam to the Pacific Regional Seminar on the Implementation of the Third Decade for the Eradication of Colonialism in Nadi, Fiji, from 21 May to 23 May 2014

Edward A. Alvarez

Presentations

Presentation to the 4th Annual Micronesia Non-Profit Congress on Self-determination, Migration

Felicidad T. Ogumoro

Book Review

Sinångan ginen i Pachot: Estorian Pasifiku ginen Guåhan (Word of Mouth: Pacific Stories from Guam)

Kelley Bowman

__________________________________-

Launch of Micronesian Educator and Discussion on Self-Determination on Guam - New Perspectives

University of Guam President Robert Underwood, a contributor to the volume,
opens the discussion.

Special Edition Editors Michael Lujan Bevacqua (l) and Victoria Lola Leon Guerrero (c) join Editor Unaisi Nabobo-Baba (r) at the unveiling of the latest edition of Micronesian Educator.

Nabobo-Baba (l) and contributor to the volume Carlyle G. Corbin at the discussions on decolonization issues. 

Moneka De Oro introduces chapter on "Trongkon Niyok - A Symbol of Settlement, Survival, Sustainability and Self-Determination for the People of Guahan."

Corbin presents chapter on "Comparative Political Development
 in the United States-administered Pacific Dependencies."  

Western Sahara's Moment in the Sun

allAfrica

Jerusalem — How the UN chief waded into a forgotten conflict with no end in sight

Of all of the world's forgotten conflicts (and there are plenty), that of Western Sahara, with its refugees tucked away in a remote desert, ranks as one of the most consigned to oblivion.

But last month, the world's top diplomat, UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon, brought the issue to temporary attention with a rather undiplomatic move. After visiting part of the disputed territory, which is claimed by both Morocco and the Algeria-backed Polisario Front, he called Morocco's presence there an "occupation."

What counts as chaos in the land of diplomacy ensued: Morocco angrily ordered civilian members of a UN peacekeeping force out; there were meetings in the UN Security Council that amounted to little and no joint expression of support for the secretary-general; and finally a spokesman tried to walk back Ban's comments, saying it had all been a "misunderstanding" born of his "spontaneous, personal reaction" to the situation of the Sahrawi refugees.

"Without meaning to do so, Ban has awoken a sleeping dog," Marina Ottoway, senior scholar at the Woodrow Wilson Center think tank, said of the secretary-general's actions.

But does that mean there could finally be progress in resolving one of the world's most intractable conflicts, one that has rumbled on largely unnoticed for more than 40 years?

Here's a look at the long-neglected Western Sahara dispute and the Sahrawi refugees stuck in the middle.

What is Western Sahara?

Western Sahara's 266,000 square kilometres formed a Spanish colony from the late 19th century until the mid-1970s. Morocco claims the territory as its own, but no country officially recognises its sovereignty and it is countered by the Polisario Front, which has a government-in-exile in Algeria and the backing of many of the indigenous Sahrawi people.

When Spain washed its hands of the area in 1975, a war between Morocco and the Polisarios ensued. In the 1980s, Morocco built a 1,500-kilometre long wall through the territory, placing 82 percent on its side and separating many families.

READ THE FULL REPORT HERE .


Also read:

Algeria: Sahrawi President Urges UN to Take 'Concrete Measures' Regarding 'Dangerous Development' in Western Sahara

Cayman Islands 'tenuous grip on self-governance"

Who rules?

Posted By: Tina Trumbach

The past week has shown us that the Cayman Islands has a more tenuous grip on self governance than we’d previously believed.

Given the modernised 2009 Constitution, most Caymanians have been lulled into a sense of security that despite being a British Overseas Territory (BOT), we had the right to rule our own destiny.

However, with calls for direct rule coming from the UK’s (United Kingdom) Opposition Leader it quickly became clear to us all that this was not outside of the realm of possibility.

We have only to look at our fellow BOT the Turks and Caicos Islands to see that it is a potential reality that Britain can hold over our heads if we don’t fall into line.

Although Prime Minister David Cameron pushed aside Labour leader Jeremy Corbyn’s comments regarding the spectre of direct rule, the damage to our psyches had already been done.

Most of us grew up blithely accepting that our elected representatives ran the country while the Governor of the day merely represented the UK on our shores.

After all, the UK is supposed to be responsible only for our national security and foreign affairs.

However, recent events and issues have pointed to a far different reality.

Look at the issue of a public registry of beneficial ownership. Our local leaders have fought this tooth and nail over the past three years, finally coming to a compromise announced this week. However, despite this agreement Premier Hon Alden McLaughlin has warned that the battle is far from over. David Cameron continues to push for a public register.

And although Mr Cameron has denied the possibility of imposing direct rule if we do not comply, we are certain that great pressure will be brought to bear. How long will we be able to withstand it?

Beyond the issue of beneficial ownership, we also have the social and cultural one of same-sex marriage. While this publication has not taken a public stance on the issue, we are keenly aware that there is strong opposition to the very idea among the local population.

Indeed, two elected representatives resigned from the ruling government over the issue late last year. And opinion against recognising same-sex marriages locally has only solidified since then, with the Cayman Ministers Association taking a pledge to uphold traditional marriage.

While any pressure from the UK on this issue has been more subtle than that exerted over beneficial ownership, the pressure is still there.

A spokesperson for James Duddridge, the UK Minister for the Overseas Territories and Africa, said “We continue to encourage all the Overseas Territories to respect human rights in their widest meaning and to embrace policies of inclusiveness.”

This was in relation to a previous statement by Mr Duddridge in the UK Parliament on the Cayman Islands position on “equal marriage” that became a point of contention with Dr Leonardo Raznovich – who is currently appealing the Immigration Appeals Tribunal’s decision not to approve his application to be added as a dependent to his partner’s work permit by virtue of their marriage in another jurisdiction.

The Premier is trying to compromise on this issue as well. He has pledged to amend the Immigration Law regulations to allow same-sex and common law spouses as work permit dependents. It is his hope that this will stem the tide, and prevent the Cayman Islands from being forced to recognise same-sex unions by the UK.

This publication has not taken a position with regard to same-sex marriage, what we are taking a position on is internal self-governance.

Cayman’s elected representatives must have the final say on issues that relate to our internal affairs. Otherwise, what is the value of our democracy? And without this assurance, is the 2009 Constitution worth the paper it is written on?

We do not see how the issue of same-sex marriage is related to good governance, our national security or our foreign affairs – the only areas which the UK is supposed to have control over.

Aren’t we supposed to have governance over issues that relate solely to our community and society? Culturally, we would hazard a well-educated guess that most Caymanians are against same-sex marriage. If it came to a point that we were being forced to adopt this, wouldn’t it have to go to referendum?

After all, as drafted, the definition of marriage in the Cayman Islands is established in our Constitution of 2009. The provisions of that document had to go to a referendum to be approved by the people, so shouldn’t changing this aspect have to go to a vote as well?

And should the Caymanian people vote “No” what would the UK response be? Would our Constitution be revoked and we be placed under direct rule for disagreeing with a social and cultural construct?

Please note, as we have said repeatedly, this is not a position on same-sex marriage. This is a genuine question on the Cayman Islands’ rights and abilities to govern, control and manage our own internal affairs.

If we can be threatened, coerced and bullied on beneficial ownership, will we experience the same on this and any other issue that we disagree with the UK on?

USVI Sports Autonomy provides participation in Olympics

V.I. OLYMPIC COMMITTEE DESCRIBES NEWLY UNVEILED LOGO AS ‘SYMBOL OF HOPE AND ASPIRATION’

ST. THOMAS — Governor Kenneth Mapp on Tuesday expressed his strong support for the Virgin Islands Olympic Team at a special Government House event to unveil its 50th anniversary logo. Preparations are now underway for the Summer Games in Rio De Janeiro, Brazil, where the new insignia will serve to proudly identify the territory’s athletes and supporters.

The territory is celebrating a half century of participation in the Olympics and a new logo design was created by the V.I. Olympic Committee in order to commemorate this special anniversary. Described as a stylized image of a colorful bird in upward flight, it’s meant to convey hope and aspiration.

READ THE FULL STORY HERE .

Canadian party wants Turks and Caicos Islands as a new province

Would such a political transition be simply a shift of the colony from a distant Commonwealth colonial power (United Kingdom) to a geographically closer one (Canada)? Or would this constitute a genuine progression from the present British colonial status to a political arrangement where the province would actually be integrated into Canada under equal terms, and where the people of the Islands would have full political, economic and social rights as other Canadian citizens - unlike the absence of these rights under the present British dependency status? Most importantly, would the international right to self-determination for the people of the colony be respected so that such a transfer would be only as a result of the will of the people? And of course, if the people of the territory express their desire for such a change, would their interest be respected?The words of Frederick Douglass are instructive:

 "Power concedes nothing without a demand. It never has, and it never will."  OTR

 ________________

Washington Post

Canada’s strange quest for its own Hawaii

By Ishaan Tharoor

On the face of it, Canada and the Turks and Caicos Islands do not have much in common.

One country is a continental behemoth of snow-capped mountains, ice-clogged bays and frost-covered plains. The other is a small cluster of sun-kissed islands and not even a country at all, but rather a territory still under the suzerainty of the British crown.

But they are united by a curious dream--that the Caribbean archipelago may one day actually join Canada as the North American nation's newest province.

READ THE FULL STORY HERE .

Cayman Premier calls for transfer of police to elected government

UK should hand police over to Cayman government

Cayman News Service.com

Premier Alden McLaughlin speaking on Radio Cayman Monday, 11 April 2016

(CNS): The premier believes the United Kingdom would be better off and the Cayman Islands would be further ahead if the Foreign and Commonwealth Office relinquished control of national security and the management of the police service to the Cayman government via a police authority. Speaking on Radio Cayman, Alden McLaughlin said the current arrangement was not working and has become extremely political, even though the politicians have no say at all in the management of the RCIPS. He also criticised the National Security Council, which, he said, was not functioning as it was envisaged during the 2009 constitutional talks.

“The UK are crazy having responsibility here for national security … It would be far better if the people could hold me or another elected member responsible,” the premier said, noting that over the last decade or so Cayman had hounded four police commissioners out of office because the post has “become so political”.

The premier was speaking about the current arrangements within the constitution regarding the police and crime during his appearance Monday on Radio Cayman’s morning show, For the Record, with Orrett Connor.

In light of the recent resignation of Police Commissioner David Baines, the perceived rise in crime and the pressure from the opposition for an entire review of the police service, McLaughlin raised his concerns about the motion that was filed by the opposition members calling for a no confidence debate in the RCIPS. He said he supported a review of the governance and management structure of the service but thought the motion was irresponsible as it was seeking a declaration that parliament has no confidence in all of the police officers, which was wrong.

Talking about the best way to address the police management, McLaughlin said he still believed, as he had during the talks with the UK over the 2009 constitution, that Cayman needed a local police authority to take control locally. He said that during those talks the idea was discussed with the UK, but with Opposition Leader Mckeeva Bush and his UDP team at the time opposed to it, the UK would not agree and retained the responsibility of national security with the governor.

The only local responsibility for the Royal Cayman Islands Police Service is its budget, which is in the hands of the home affairs ministry, now led by McLaughlin. The creation of a National Security Council was supposed to give the elected arm more say in policy, but noting that everything to do with police policy remains with the governor, McLaughlin said the NSC did not “function the way it should”.

However, he said the public still looks to the politicians for answers, even though they are not responsible and can do very little to influence what happens with the police.

“The construct does not work and the UK would be well advised to agree to allow a police authority,” he said. “Cayman, the UK and the governor will all be better off if we had a police authority responsible for the police service and the commissioner, instead of the post being line managed by the governor.”

Concerned that it will become increasingly difficult to fill the post of commissioner because of the strength of public feeling that there should be more local control over the police, he said that management of the police had become a “poisoned chalice” but one that he would take on nonentheless, as it “was critical to Cayman”. He pointed out that Cayman had enjoyed a long, peaceful history and when one heard of three armed robberies in one weekend, “those things are chilling”.

Welcoming the discussion and debate, which is now expected to take place in the Legislative Assembly on Thursday, 28 April, McLaughlin said he was happy to debate the issues but was concerned that the motion as it stands now, which calls for a declaration of no confidence in the entire police service, will not improve what is already a difficult situation.

U.S. bill would remove financial management from Puerto Rico

U.S. House Natural Resources Committee 

Releases Puerto Rico Legislation 

By Eva Lloréns Vélez 

on April 12, 2016

ShareTweetShareShareShare

SAN JUAN – The U.S. House Committee on Natural Resources released Tuesday H.R. 4900, the Puerto Rico Oversight, Management, and Economic Stability Act (PROMESA), which if passed as is will impose a seven-member financial oversight board over Puerto Rico that would be appointed by the president and will have broad encompassing powers over the island.

The Financial Oversight & Management Board’s members would be selected from a list of candidates submitted by the U.S. House speaker, Senate majority leader, and minority leaders of the House and Senate. The board, which will have offices in Puerto Rico and anywhere else needed, will appoint an executive director.

The governor of Puerto Rico would be an ex-oficio member without voting powers.

READ THE FULL REPORT HERE .

******

The United States Must Relinquish Puerto Rico

Compañeros Unidos para la Descolonización de Puerto Rico: Cita Patriótica ONU Junio 2012

This year, 2016, marks a new era in Caribbean colonialism.

The US Congress is preparing a "Financial Control Authority," which will supervise the finances of the entire government of Puerto Rico -- its legislature and courts, public authorities, pension system and all leases, union contracts and collective bargaining agreements. The authority will also restructure the entire public workforce (including teachers and police), freeze public pensions and ensure "the payment of debt obligations." Then it will issue its own debt, spend the funds as it sees fit and leave Puerto Rico to pay the bill.

Congress can veto any law passed in Puerto Rico

The authority will also have prosecutorial powers. It will be empowered to "conduct necessary investigations" into the government of Puerto Rico, or in other words, be empowered to hold hearings, secure government records, demand evidence, take testimony, subpoena witnesses and administer oaths -- under penalty of perjury -- to all witnesses.

Any witness who fails to appear or to supply information will be subject to criminal prosecution and removal from office. This includes any elected official on the island: even the governor and attorney general.

All of these powers are enumerated in the 157-page Senate Bill 2381, also known as the "Puerto Rico Assistance Act of 2015," which is currently under review in the US Senate.

Read the full article in: Compañeros Unidos para la Descolonización de Puerto Rico: Cita Patriótica ONU Junio 2012 

DUTCH ADMIT SPYING ON BONAIRE POLITICIAN JOPIE ABRAHAM

 by Janene Pieters

nltimes.nl

Intelligence service AIVD unjustly collected information on Bonaire former minister and deputy Jopie Abraham while he was negotiating Bonaire joining the Netherlands, Minister Ronald Plasterk of Home Affairs admitted in a letter to Abraham, NRC reports. 

(Bonaire became a Dutch 'public entity' under partial integratiion. A subsequent referendum on the island rejected the status after the five year period ending in 2015 - OTR)  

The CTIVD, the committee that oversees and supervises the intelligence services in the Netherlands, launched an investigation after Abraham filed a complaint last year. The complaint regarded the AIVD’s actions between 2005 and 2010. Abraham believes that the AIVD spied on Bonaire politicians while they negotiated with the Dutch government on joining the Netherlands Bonaire became part of the Netherlands in 2010.

According to Plasterk, the CTIVD advised him to declare Abraham’s complaint “partly justified and partly unfounded”. The reasons behind this advice are confidential. Plasterk states that the CTIVD found the AIVD’s actions “largely just”. “However, in respect of a short period, the CTIVD came to the conclusion that no investigation should have been carried out, so that part of the investigation is unlawful.” the Minister wrote to Abraham.

Exactly why the investigation was unlawful during that “short period”, the Minister does not say. But he does add that “measures” were now taken to prevent similar circumstances in the future.

****************************

Jopie Abraham was unlawfully spied on

The Daily Herald

Sint Maarten

THE HAGUE--The Dutch intelligence and security service AIVD acted partially on illegal grounds when it gathered information on the now retired Bonaire politician Jopie Abraham in the period 2005-2010, concluded the Committee of Supervision on the Intelligence and Security Agencies CTIVD recently.

The Dutch newspaper NRC revealed on Friday that Minister of Home Affairs and Kingdom Relations Ronald Plasterk sent a letter to Abraham of the Bonaire Democratic Party PDB on Tuesday in which he informed the former Minister of the Netherlands Antilles, and Commissioner and Member of the Island Council of Bonaire, of the results of the investigation by the CTIVD.

Abraham had filed a formal complaint in August and September 2015 against the conduct of the AIVD in the period January 2005 to October 2010. Abraham accused the AIVD of spying on Bonaire politicians during the negotiations with the Dutch Government in the process to dismantle the Netherlands Antilles and to make Bonaire part of the Netherlands. 

Plasterk’s letter dated March 29, 2016, a copy of which has been supplied to The Daily Herald, stated that the CTIVD had advised to declare Abraham’s complaint “partially founded” and “partially unfounded.”

However, the Minister couldn’t supply the motivation of the CTIVD because the committee’s report is filed as classified. The law states that data that can give an indication as to the identity of a source, an ongoing investigation or investigation method cannot be made public. As such the CTIVD report will remain classified. “I cannot send you the report,” Plasterk informed Abraham.

The Minister stated that he was unable to divulge whether the AIVD investigation, which he said was based on its legal task description, was carried out in the Netherlands or outside. “I can also not provide information on the way the investigation was carried out.”

Plasterk remained unclear as to the period that the AIVD investigation covered. However, the CTIVD concluded that no investigation by the AIVD during a “short period,” and as such this part of the investigation should be considered “illegal.”

In concluding, Plasterk stated that Abraham’s complaint for the largest part of the period in question was unfounded. This means, explained the Minister, “that in this period no investigation was carried out of your person, be it that this investigation largely took place legally.” 

Plasterk stated that “measures” were taken in the meantime. He pointed out to Abraham that the latter had the right to turn to the National Ombudsman regarding the handling of his complaint. When contacted by The Daily Herald for a reaction, Abraham responded that at this moment he had no comment as he was considering what his possible next step would be.

Abraham did supply his March 17, 2016 letter to Plasterk in which he urged the Minister to immediately respond to his complaint. “The handling of my complaint is starting to turn into a comedy,” stated the retired Bonaire politician.

In his letter, Abraham pointed out that in January he was informed by the CTIVD that its advice had been forwarded to the Minister. “It is now nine weeks later, and you repeatedly ask for postponement. In February you again ask for a postponement of four weeks. This was five weeks ago, and still I haven’t received a reaction,” stated an obviously irate Abraham. 

Abraham’s struggle to get more information about his suspicions that he had been the subject of investigation dates back to September 2014, when requested to see his AIVD dossier. He received confirmation from Plasterk that there was information on him at the AIVD, but that this could not be supplied to him.

Abraham filed a complaint, and was able to elucidate on his grievances during a hearing with the AIVD in May 2015. In July 2015, Plasterk again refused Abraham to see his AIVD dossier, for “reasons of national security.” Initially, Plasterk refused to take Abraham’s complaint about the working method of the AIVD into consideration. This decision was retracted shortly after. A hearing with the CTIVD took place in October 2015.

In 2013, the NRC newspaper disclosed that the AIVD from 2005 to 2010 had spied on several Bonaire politicians: Ramonsito Booi and Burney El Hage, both of the UPB party, and Abraham.

NRC reported that it concerned an illegal operation which was kept secret from the then Netherlands Antilles Government. It turned out that the AIVD didn’t have the required permission of the Prime Minister of the Netherlands Antilles at the time, Emily de Jongh-Elhage.

Nos Ke Boneiru of Bonaire rejects participation in Dutch referendum on EU-Ukraine Association Agreement

(Translations below)

James Fines

Nos Ke Boneiru Bek  

Letter To: The Minister of the Interior 

and Kingdom Relations, R.H.A. Plasterk

and to the

gezaghebber di Bonaire, E. E. Rijna

Kalendijk, 4 april 2016

Tema: invitashon pa 1e referendum konsultativo riba diarason 6 april 2016

Apresiabel senjoresnan,

Segun boso kampanja di informashon nos a konstata ku boso ta invita e poblashon di Karibe Hulandes pa partisipa na un referendum konsultativo riba 6 april benidero riba  “lei di aprobashon di akuerdo di asosashon entre Komunidat Oropeo i Oekraine” Pa e referendum aki boso servisio a parti karchi di vota bao di e poblashon Boneriano ku e intenshon ku e poblashon pa bai vota riba 6 april benidero ku si nan ta di akuerdo o kontra e lei aki.

En konekshon ku ariba menshona nos lo kier trese lo siguiente na boso atenshon:

Ta ironiko ku boso ta invita e poblashon Boneriano ku korto tempu pasa, 18 desember ultimo, den un referendum jama pa nos representashon di pueblo, esnan demokratiko skohe pa e pueblo Boneriano, nos raad, e referendum tabata “riba e posishon estatal di Boneiru”i ku nan ta “eens o kontra e kontenido ku a wordu duna na laso direkto ku Hulanda” na 10-10-10 di aktual ilegal strukturaestatal, e islan BES su integrashon-partial-den konstealshon Hulandes, i ku a wordu rechasa (5040= 65% No-kontra-voto).                                                                              

Mesun resultado tabatin ku e referendum di St Eustatius riba 17 desember 2014, kaminda na tambe ja kaba a rechasa e laso aktual ku Hulanda i a skohe pa un proseso-di-autonomia o gobernashon propio.

Ta inkonprendibel kon boso komo gobernantenan responsabel i kontra boso mes akuerdonan internashonal i kontra lei internashonal i e fundamento legal di nos estado di derecho, e bos di e pueblo Boneriano i di e pueblo si Sint Eustatius, ta neglisha e rechaso legitimo i boso okupashon i administrashon ilegal di e pueblonan humilde aki i ta presenta un otro stunt demokratiko i kier enbolbi o maniobra nos den boso proseso demokratiko Hulandes-Oropeo. 

Por ta boso ta di opinion pa den futuro bagaletisa i overrule e bos demokratiko di e pueblonan aki dor di e derecho di vota aki? Pues ku nos por a partisipa den boso proseso i mekanismo demokratiko, boso referendum-konsulktativo?

Pa medio di esaki ami ta deklara ofisialmente di no ta parisipa den boso referendum Oropeo-Hulandes pasobra ami segun fundamento legal internashonal ta pertenese na e isla o teritorio i pueblo Boneiru komo parti di Reino Hulandes i no ta pertenese na teritorio i pueblo Hulandes na Oropa ku tambe ta pertenese na Reino Hulandes i ta wordu goberna pa 1ste i 2de Kamer.

Pero boso ta duna nos e oportunidat ku refrendum aki si pa ilustra o kompara e situashon politiko entre Okraina -Krimea i esun Hulanda -Boneiru.

Pa nos komparabel kaminda boso kontra boso mesun akuerdonan i lei internashonal bao di intimidashon abierto i publiko di nos gobernantenan a forsa nos den e struktura aki i anexa e teritorionan di islanan-BES, pues Boneiru riba 10-10-10.                                                             

Un biaha mas nos kier menshona ku boso a hasi e pueblonan humilde di Boneiru i Sint Eustatius hopi infelis desde 10-10-10 i ku boso tin ku realisa ku esaki mester stop i ku boso mester respeta i juda realisa e deseo di e pueblonan aki.

Na final nos kier mustra boso riba un investigashon di boso mes ekspertonan, esaki los for di e raport-Spies ku a pone lus riba e BES-pesadia i a konklui su frakaso kompleto, ku boso Koninklijk Instituut voor Taal-, Land- en Volkenkunde (KITLV) su investigashon riba e pregunta di boso representashon i presensia Hulandes riba Boneiru, ku 73% di e poblashon Boneriano ta negativo riba esaki i ku esaki ta prinisipalmente dor di e aktual relashon konstitushonal-estatal ku Hulanda. 

Pues nos konseho na boso ta pa respeta e bos di e pueblo Boneriano, e referendum di 18 desember 2015 i e diferente investigashonan ku ta papia palabra kla i pone komienso na e proseso pa garantisa nos derechonan di autodeterminashon, de-kolonisashon i derechonan humano i juda nos re-establese i realisa esakinan. Pues retrosede boso aktual maneho ku ta indika klaramente riba re-populashon i neokolonisashon Hulandes di e humilde pueblo Boneriano.

Atentamente,

James Finies, Nos Ke Boneiru Bek

_____

To: The Minister of the Interior and Kingdom Relations, R.H.A. Plasterk The Governor of Bonaire, E. E. Rijna

Kale Dijk, April 4, 2016

Subject: Call for 1st consultative referendum on Wednesday, April 6th, 2016

Dear Sirs,

According to your information campaign we have observed that the invites the people of the Caribbean Netherlands to participate in an advisory referendum on 6 April, the "Law for approval of the Association Agreement between the EU and Ukraine" This referendum has your service voting passes distributed among the population of Bonaire with the intention that the population will vote on April 6 as whether they are for or against.

In connection with the above, we bring the following to your attention:

It is extremely ironic that you Bonairean people invite to recently, on 18 December in our representative democracy, our island council voted referendum "on the constitutional position of Bonaire" and whether they "agree or against the implementation of the direct link with Netherlands' per 10-10-10 this current illegitimate and illegal state, the BES islands partial integration-related condition, have rejected oficieel (5040 = 65% No-against-votes). The same result was St Eustatius referendum on 17 desember 2014, who also rejected the current relationship with the Netherlands and has opted for autonomy process. 

It is almost incomprehensible how as responsible drivers your international conventions and to international law and the legal basis of our democratic state, the voice of the Boneriaans people and the people of St Eustatius, the legitimate rejection of your Illegal occupation and administration of these humble people ignore and relist an Illegal democratic stunt, would involve or inluizen by us in your own Dutch-European democratic process. Are you perhaps planning to bagalitiseren the democratic voice of the peoples in the future and to overrule this franchise ?, so that we may have condensed dissipation in your democratic process and mechanism, your consultative referendum?

Herewith I declare officially not to participate in your Euro-Dutch referendum because I under international law according to the overseas territory and people of Bonaire in the Kingdom of the Netherlands belong and not to the territory and people of the Netherlands in Europe controlled by your first and second chamber.

You offer it the opportunity with this referendum to draw the political situation and comparing our view with Ukraine-Crimea and Netherlands-Bonaire. For us similar to that Bonaire at your own arrangements and conventions and international law our drivers under open and public intimidation in this state context, and forced the territories of the BES islands Bonaire on 10-10-10. 

Once again we inform you that you these humble people, the Bonairean and Statian made miserable since and you have to realize that this must stop and should respect and help meet the needs of these peoples. Finally, I would point to a study conducted independently of the Spies report by your own Eksperten by light throughout BES nightmare and concluded the complete failure of this, the Royal Institute of Southeast Asian and Caribbean Studies (KITLV) research, the question about your Dutch representation and presence in Bonaire, 73% of the population Boneriaans be negative about this and that it is primarily by the current constitutional state context and structure.

So our advice to you is to respect the voice of the Boneriaans people, the referendum of 18 desember 2015 and various studies speak clearly and to initiate the process to ensure our self-determination, de-colonization and human rights, repair and help realize. Thus, withdrawal of your current policy denoting visible on Dutch re-population and neo-colonization of the Boneriaans people.

With kind regards,

James Finies, Nos Ke Boneiru Bek.

Cc. Directors of Public Body Bonaire Island Council of the Public Body Bonaire Members of the Standing Committee Member of the Standing Committee of the 1st and 2nd Room