Pro Soualiga: “Decolonization Summit Facts Not Conjecture”
Dear Editor,
Please allow us to reply to your article entitled “Pro Soualiga Calls For De-Colonization Summit.” Firstly, you mention that in 1960, Dutch representative Einaar stated “We in Surinam and the Netherlands Antilles are proud of our self-government and cannot accept being called colonies.” The problem with Einaar’s statement is that the United Nations have NEVER declared that the former Netherlands Antilles has attained a full measure of self-government, a right to self-determination, or that Chapter XI no longer applies to the former Netherlands Antilles. Mr. Einaar’s statement was an opinion not supported by U.N. Resolution 945 (X).
You then go on to mention that Resolution 945 (X) states “…that the people of the Netherlands Antilles and Surinam have expressed through their freely elected representative bodies, their approval of the constitutional order.” Did the U.N. General Assembly agree with the aforementioned statement? They certainly did not because, as stated earlier, nowhere in Resolution 945 (X) does the United Nations state that the former Netherlands Antilles has attained a full measure of self-government, a right to self-determination, or that Chapter XI no longer applies to the former Netherlands Antilles. Those three statements were standard uniform practice in the resolutions of Puerto Rico in 1953, Greenland in 1954, Alaska and Hawaii in 1959, but NOT in 1955 for the former Netherlands Antilles.
It is then mentioned that the United Nations Assembly “Expresses the cessation of the transformation of information under Article 73e of the in respect of the Netherlands Antilles and Surinam is appropriate.” What you fail to mention is that India added an amendment to Resolution 945 (X) which states that while the Netherlands were excused from Article 73e, Article 73 a – d remain in force.
On April 23rd, 2021, the Dutch State admitted in the Court of First Instance that there does not exist ANY U.N. Resolution which states that Article 73 (Chapter XI) does not apply to the former Netherlands Antilles. If that U.N. Resolution does not exist, it means that the former Netherlands Antilles still fall under Article 73 and the Netherlands are obligated to abide by it.
You then claim that the United Nations took the Netherlands Antilles off the list of Non-Self-Governing Territories. Whenever a country is removed from the list of Non-Self-Governing Territories the UN tends to provide a resolution declaring such. Can you provide any UN Resolution which acknowledges the removal of the Netherlands Antilles from the list of Non-Self-Governing Territories? Maybe the Dutch State can assist with that.
Because the Netherlands were the only administering state excused from reporting back to the UN in 1955, the former Netherlands Antilles were omitted from the list that was drawn up in 1963. Dr. Hillebrink’s thesis supports that fact. Again, bear in mind that only the UN can determine whether a territory has been decolonized or not. If there is no UN Resolution acknowledging our removal from the list of NSGT’s then we remain on the original list of 1946 under Resolution 66 (1).
In closing, the Dutch State has admitted that there is no UN Resolution stating that “Article 73 no longer applies to the Netherlands Antilles.” That admittance means that we still fall under Article 73. Since we fall under Article 73, it means that the former Netherlands Antilles must be reinscribed on the list of Non-Self-Governing Territories. Additionally, you claim that we are not on the current list of NSGT’s which is indeed true. However, can you produce any UN Resolution which removed the Netherlands Antilles from the list of Non-Self-Governing Territories? New Caledonia and French Polynesia were re-listed in 2006 and 2013 respectively. Both have U.N. Resolutions declaring their re-listing. Where is the UN Resolution which removed us from the list of Non-Self-Governing Territories?
Thank you,
Renate L. Brison
###
