PHILIPSBURG: --- The ongoing saga at St. Maarten's utility company, GEBE, has raised serious questions about corporate governance, transparency, and the proper role of the government as a shareholder. While Prime Minister Dr. Luc Mercelina has publicly emphasized an "arms-length" approach, recent actions by the Council of Ministers paint a conflicting picture, suggesting direct intervention rather than principled oversight. This has created a cloud of uncertainty over the company's leadership and its ability to serve the public effectively.
At the heart of this issue lies GEBE's own Articles of Incorporation. Specifically, Article 12 outlines the responsibilities of the Supervisory Board, which is the SBOD of GEBE. Point 2 grants the SBOD the authority to provide "general directions" concerning the company's policies, while Point 11 specifies the role of "supervising" the management. These clauses are designed to ensure that the SBOD can guide the company's strategic direction and hold its leadership accountable without becoming entangled in its day-to-day operational affairs. This principle of separation is fundamental to sound corporate governance.
However, the Prime Minister's recent actions appear to challenge this very principle. Despite publicly stating that the shareholder's role is one of oversight, not direct management, Dr. Mercelina and the Council of Ministers voted to appoint Jeffreyson Paris as the new Chief Operations Officer (COO). This move directly contradicts the notion of an arms-length relationship. Instead of allowing the established corporate structure, namely the Supervisory Board of Directors (SBoD), to manage executive appointments, the government appears to have inserted its preferred candidate into a key operational role.
This decision is made more concerning by the fact that the SBoD had reportedly submitted its own list of candidates for director positions nearly a year ago. Those appointments have yet to be finalized, leaving critical leadership roles in limbo. The government's decision to bypass this process and install its own choice for COO sends a troubling message: that established corporate procedures can be sidestepped at will. This not only undermines the authority of the Supervisory Board but also introduces political considerations into what should be purely operational decisions.
The implications of this governance crisis are far-reaching. For a company as critical as GEBE, stable and independent leadership is essential. The constant delays in appointments and apparent political maneuvering create a leadership vacuum that can paralyze decision-making and hinder progress on urgent issues. For years, residents and businesses have complained about inaccurate billing and the inability to receive invoices, sometimes for periods extending over two years
A company struggling with such fundamental operational challenges requires a steady, empowered management team, not one subject to the shifting winds of politics.
When the government blurs the lines between shareholder oversight and operational meddling, it erodes trust—not just within the company, but also among the public it serves. Consumers who have patiently waited for resolutions to their billing issues are now left to wonder if the company's leadership is focused on fixing these problems or on navigating internal politics.
Moving forward, a firm commitment to the principles outlined in GEBE's own Articles of Incorporation is essential. The government must respect the role of the Supervisory Board and allow it to function as intended. Appointing qualified directors based on merit and experience, free from political influence, is the first step toward restoring stability and credibility. Transparency, accountability, and a genuine adherence to corporate governance are not optional—they are the only way to ensure GEBE can effectively and reliably serve the people of St. Martin.