Sixteen years after Bonaire’s transition into a public entity within the Netherlands on 10 October 2010, fundamental questions remain about democratic consent, human rights, economic inequality, cultural identity and the right of Bonaireans to shape their own future.
The promise of a better life through closer ties with the Netherlands must be measured against people’s lived experiences. Rising living costs, housing pressures, access to essential services, protection of Papiamentu and cultural identity, and limited influence over decisions affecting Bonaire continue to raise questions about whether the transition delivered what people expected.
On 7 October 2010, I, James Finies of the Bonaire Human Rights Organization (BHRO), sent a warning and objection letter to then Lieutenant Governor Glenn Thode and other Dutch and local and Antillean governments. The concerns raised then remain relevant today.
The December 2010 referendum recorded 2,879 votes against the proposition concerning Bonaire’s public-entity status under Article 134 of the Dutch Constitution, compared with 391 in favour. The required turnout threshold was not met. Nevertheless, the failure of the then island government and council that had the power to recognise the rejection as a legitimate expression of the people, and did not remain a contentious chapter in Bonaire’s constitutional political history. Questions also remain about the final report of the United Nations (UN) electoral observer who visited Bonaire during the referendum. Despite subsequent inquiries, the Dutch government has never released the report for public availability.
After 222 days of continuous, day-and-night protest demanding another referendum, an agreement was reached to hold a vote. On 18 December 2015, Bonaireans again expressed their dissatisfaction with the constitutional relationship.
Of 7,689 valid votes, 5,040 — approximately 65.55% — voted “No,” while 2,649 voted “Yes.” The Island Council unanimously endorsed the result as a democratic decision of the people. Yet, in my view, the failure to deliver meaningful change represented another disregard of the democratic decision and will of the Bonaire people.
Despite unresolved concerns from both referenda, a further constitutional change took effect on 17 November 2017. The Netherlands introduced Article 132a, embedding Bonaire, Sint Eustatius and Saba in its Constitution as public bodies. This occurred against the democratic will and decision of the people.
In my view, the island’s political leaders, who are still active, once again accepted deeper constitutional integration without a direct mandate from the people, disregarding and betraying their democratic rejection expressed in 2010 and 2015, and undermining Bonaireans’ right to decide our constitutional status.
A young Bonairean recently questioned whether people in 2010 fully understood the implications of the transition. Many expected better salaries, improved living standards and better essential services, yet concerns remain about local control, rising costs, household income and the growing dominance of Dutch in education at the expense of Papiamentu and cultural identity.
A constitutional arrangement must be judged not only by its promises, but by its effects on the people. Bonaire needs development, that is a fundamental right of the people, but not at the expense of Bonaireans' right to determine our own future, cultural identity or public participation. Healthcare, education, social protection and economic opportunities are not favours; they are fundamental human-rights concerns under international standards to which the Netherlands is committed.
During the UN Committee on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (CESCR) examination of the Netherlands in September 2025 in Geneva, BHRO submitted a report directly to Chair Ambassador Preeti Saran and Rapporteur Julieta Rossi on 17 September. Committee members raised questions concerning healthcare, cultural adaptation, consultation, respect for cultural and religious beliefs, and the protection of Bonaire’s native language and cultural identity in education.
The Committee’s concluding observations expressed concern about limited information on economic, social and cultural rights in Bonaire, Sint Eustatius and Saba. The Netherlands must explain how it will address these concerns. Constitutional integration alone does not guarantee equal rights in practice.
On 10 June 2026, the Bahamas advanced an initiative draft resolution within the UN General Assembly supporting Bonaire’s proposed reinstatement on the list of Non-Self-Governing Territories. This brought Bonaire’s case before UN and the entire world, and raised fundamental questions about its status, self-government and right to determine their own political future.
Chapter XI, Article 73 of the UN Charter addresses administering powers’ responsibilities towards territories whose peoples have not attained a full measure of self-government. The right of Bonerians to determine their own political future is also recognised in Article 1 of both the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights and the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights. Reinstatement on the UN list list of colonies would provide a framework for accountability and renewed international scrutiny of the Netherlands’ responsibilities towards Bonaire’s political status and development.
Where is the 2010 UN electoral observer’s report? What action will address Bonaire’s human-rights concerns? How will Papiamentu and cultural identity be protected? And when will Bonaireans have a meaningful voice in determining their future?
Bonaireans deserve more than promises. They deserve transparency, equal protection of their rights, respect for their identity and genuine participation in decisions affecting their lives. The demand is for justice and accountability, and a future in which Bonaire’s people have a meaningful and rightful say in their own destiny.
James Finies
.jpg)