Suspended MP Theo Heyliger (right) entering the Courthouse on Wednesday morning.
PHILIPSBURG–Suspended Member of Parliament (MP) Theo Heyliger appeared in Court on Wednesday for a hearing in the Catfish investigation. During the hearing, the Prosecutor submitted a demand of twelve months in prison, six of which to be suspended, and a five-year suspension of Heyliger’s passive voting rights.
The Prosecutor considered it proven that both Heyliger (49) and co-suspect J.M.S. (71) attempted to bribe former MP Romain Laville with money and a ministerial post to “jump ship”. The Prosecutor did not consider it proven that Laville was also offered a parcel of land.
S., who was Laville’s political advisor and mentor, is facing a demand of 120 hours of community service, 60 of which to be suspended, and a five-year suspension of his passive voting rights.
The Court will give its decisions in these cases November 14.
The Catfish investigation started in March 2013 after Laville filed an official complaint with the National Detectives of attempted bribery to “jump ship”.
Heyliger and S. are both charged with having attempted to bribe Laville during the period of September 1, 2012, to July 25, 2013. The suspicion is that both made various promises to Laville with the intention that he would give up his seat in Parliament, thus withdrawing support from the then-Wescot-Williams II Cabinet.
Sums of money ranging from US $135,000 to $350,000 allegedly were promised to Laville. A post as Minister of Tourism, Economic Affairs, Transport and Telecommunication (TEATT) in the then new Cabinet to be formed were also offered, all of this if Laville “obliged by giving up his seat in Parliament,” which would then go to Heyliger, according to the Prosecutor’s Office.
According to the Prosecutor, the suspects had met with Laville on at least four occasions to discuss the proposal. During these meetings, a number of topics were discussed, amongst them giving up his seat in Parliament.
Heyliger’s lawyer Eldon “Peppie” Sulvaran had hired a private investigator who wrote a report to contradict the evidence presented by the Prosecution. However, the Prosecutor said he had noted several inaccuracies in this report. He said that while the report claims that no incriminating information was uncovered, Heyliger allegedly had partly confirmed the course of events during interrogation in 2017 and 2018, and the statement of S. had supported the evidence.
Motivating the requested punishment, the Prosecutor noted that the maximum term of imprisonment for bribery is two years, or a fine of up to NAf. 300.
“This is not a firm maximum penalty, and although the new Penal Code increases the maximum sentence to four years, the former maximum sentence of two years is decisive,” the Prosecutor explained, as the alleged crimes were committed when the former Penal Code was still valid.
‘Ship-jumping’
The Prosecutor’s Office is of the opinion that the maximum penalty does not do justice to the consequences of this punishable act.
“We are talking about the phenomenon of ‘ship-jumping’, which is, unfortunately, a well-known phenomenon in St. Maarten. This determines the seriousness of the crime.
“Ship-jumping can best be described as the transition of a politician from one political party to another. That in itself is not a bad thing and there is no rule of constitutional law that prohibits it. However, if this happens too often and too regularly, it will not benefit the stability of the parliamentary democracy in question. Also, when money or a position is offered to the ship-jumper, it is a criminal act, because then the criminal law comes into play,” the Prosecutor said in Court.
“It is precisely for this reason that bribing a civil servant – for example, a Member of Parliament – in St. Maarten has been a punishable offence for many years. A Member of Parliament in St. Maarten should bear in mind only one interest: the interest of the country and the people of St. Maarten.”
The Prosecutor said that St. Maarten’s interests are achieved through stability. “After all, stability is a prerequisite for progress. Only if there is some long-term stability can large-scale, country-wide problems or challenges be adequately tackled.”
Without having the intention to turn this criminal case into a political one, the Prosecutor said that some of these challenges for St. Maarten include the dump and the reconstruction following Hurricane Irma.
“In short, no one will be able to argue successfully that stability is undesirable. And no one will successfully be able to argue that ship-jumping leads to stability. In this case, ship-jumping eventually led to the fall of the Wescot-Williams II Cabinet,” the Prosecutor stated.
Vote-getter
Heyliger and S. both denied the accusations and their lawyers pleaded for their acquittal. Attorney Geert Hatzmann said the Prosecutor’s Office did not have a strong case against S.
“The Prosecutor makes us believe as if Heyliger would have bought himself a seat in Parliament similar to someone buying a car on eBay,” he said.
Hatzmann and Sulvaran both pointed out that Heyliger was a popular veteran politician and the highest vote-getter in many elections, as well as the uncontested leader of his United People’s (UP) party. Such a politician does not need to resort to bribery or any other crime to reach his political goals, they stated.
“It is a ridiculous idea that he would have offered money because the UP wanted to take National Alliance’s place in the coalition government,” said Hatzmann.
Sulvaran also denied that his client was guilty of bribery. “The Prosecutor’s Office considers him a sophisticated briber who allegedly offered money, land and a ministerial position in government to obtain a position in the centre of power, but why would a popular vote-getter resort to such practices?” Sulvaran asked in dismissing this case as a “fantasy”.
Both lawyers pointed out that no traces of any payment to Laville had been found and that a banking investigation in Panama had also failed to yield any result. No land was issued to Laville or to members of his family either. Also, no ministerial position was offered to him.
The lawyers agreed that apologies were offered to Laville’s family for “nasty” comments made in the social media about Laville’s seriously ill mother, but that was common courtesy and had nothing to do with canvassing the relationship between Heyliger and Laville, who was described as being a highly emotional person.
Source: The Daily Herald https://www.thedailyherald.sx/islands/91961-update-theo-faces-prison-suspension-of-voting-rights-in-catfish-case
View comments
Hide comments