New Extradition law proposed for St. Maarten, Aruba and Curaçao

THE HAGUE--The Kingdom government has submitted a new proposal to place the extradition rules for Aruba, Curaçao and St. Maarten into a formal Kingdom Act, replacing the current system that traces its origins to the old Curaçao Extradition Decree of 1926.

The proposal, officially titled Rijkswet uitlevering voor Aruba, Curaçao en Sint Maarten, has been submitted to the Dutch House of Representatives and concerns the extradition framework used in the Caribbean countries of the Kingdom. According to the official bill page, the existing rules are currently contained in the Extradition Decree for Aruba, Curaçao and St. Maarten, a separate general Kingdom administrative measure that the proposal now seeks to convert into a Kingdom Act.

The explanatory memorandum makes clear that the change is driven largely by the amendment to the Charter for the Kingdom that took effect on January 1, 2024. Since that amendment, Kingdom affairs must generally be regulated by or pursuant to a Kingdom Act, while independent general Kingdom administrative measures are only allowed in urgent, exceptional cases and for a limited period. Existing measures must therefore be converted, given a legal basis, or withdrawn within the transition period.

Although the proposal gives the extradition rules a firmer legal foundation, the government stresses that it is not intended to overhaul daily practice. The explanatory memorandum says the current provisions are being transferred as much as possible without major substantive changes, with updates mainly involving clearer wording, modernized terminology and better structure.

The background to the proposal goes back a century. Extradition for the former Netherlands Antilles was originally governed by the Curaçao Extradition Decree of 1926. That decree was later renamed and amended several times, eventually becoming the Extradition Decree for Aruba, Curaçao and St. Maarten. The current decree was last amended on March 1, 2024.

The new bill also codifies several safeguards that already follow from case law. These include protections related to the ne bis in idem principle, meaning a person should not be extradited for a matter that has already been finally dealt with, as well as grounds to refuse extradition where discriminatory prosecution or particular hardship is at issue. The explanatory memorandum states that several Supreme Court rulings are being incorporated into the new legal text.

The proposal also addresses cases involving convictions in absentia. Extradition for the enforcement of such a sentence may be refused where the requested person did not have, and will not still receive, a sufficient opportunity to defend himself or herself.

The division of responsibilities remains broadly the same. The Common Court of Justice continues to assess whether extradition is legally admissible, while the Governor retains responsibility for the final decision on certain refusal grounds. The explanatory memorandum specifically states that the proposal does not seek to change the current division of powers.

The bill also maintains the basic rule that Dutch nationals are not extradited. An exception remains possible for prosecution abroad, but only if the Governor is satisfied that any unconditional prison sentence can eventually be served in the person’s own country.

Terrorism-related offenses receive detailed treatment in the proposal. While extradition is generally not allowed for political offenses, the bill lists exceptions tied to terrorism treaties and related international obligations. The explanatory memorandum explains that the provision has been updated to reflect treaty developments and to clarify when those exceptions apply to Aruba, Curaçao and St. Maarten.

‍