A Chapter That Cannot Be Overlooked: The Debate Over Single-Party Governance in Curaçao
September 5, 2024
There was a time during the eighties when the political landscape of Curaçao was heavily influenced by the ideas surrounding Kousa Komun. During this period, many became convinced that the root of our governance problems lay in the coalition system, which they deemed inherently unstable. This belief led to vigorous advocacy and the development of models to establish a single-party government that would rule for a full four-year term. The idea was that, after those four years, the electorate would have a clear opportunity to judge the party's performance, and the political landscape would be less frag-mented.
Despite the inherent advantages of the coalition system, such as broad representation and the need for compromise, the proponents of single-party governance were not swayed. They argued that coalition governments were prone to instability and inefficiency, and that a single party in power would provide the clarity and continuity needed for effective governance. However, they also recognized the signifi-cant risks of such a system, particularly the potential for authoritarian tendencies to emerge. To mitigate this, they proposed the possibility of holding a referendum midway through the government's term to give the population a chance to remove the ruling party if necessary.
For two decades, this debate raged on, with extensive discussions, writings, and conferences dedicated to the topic. Yet, despite the in-tensity of the discourse, the debate eventually faded away, seemingly without resolution, like a candle burning out.
In this context, the current political situation in Curaçao presents a unique test case. Today, we are governed by a single party, which raises the question of whether the concerns voiced in those earlier debates were valid. As we observe the governance of this single-party administration, we must consider whether the fears of dictatorial tendencies were justified and whether the benefits of coalition gov-ernance are indeed indispensable.
This moment in our political history serves as a reminder of the ongoing tension between stability and representation, and whether the dreams of a streamlined, single-party government can truly withstand the test of time and democratic values. The outcome of this period may very well influence future discussions on how best to govern Curaçao, and whether the coalition system, with all its flaws, remains the better choice for a vibrant democracy.
Miguel Goede
Comments