MARIGOT--Former President of the Territorial Council Alain Richardson has cautioned he expects the State to fight “tooth and nail” to reduce what is owed if the Constitutional Court agrees the Collectivité never received just compensation for the transfer of competences at the time of the change of status in 2007.

 

He explained the organic law stipulated transfer of competences must be done in “financial neutrality,” meaning from day one transfers and financial means must come at no cost to the Collectivité.

 

But it turned out total revenues were exceeding costs of compensation by 634,000 euros that resulted in the negative balance arrived at by the Commission d’ Evaluation des Charges. In addition there was no compensation for the loss of the annual 11.6 million euros from the Octroi de Mer (share of import duties) from Guadeloupe.

 

“At the time when I was in the Opposition I indicated to the then President Frantz Gumbs that we would have to use the Question Prioritiare Constitutionnalité (QPC) procedure because of the conclusion of the Commission d’ Evaluation des Charges that we owed the State.

 

“As a result of the Commission’s report the Collectivité started out with a substantial deficit in its budget, about 20 per cent of income missing. So it had no chance to exercise its “Libre d’Administration” (freedom of administration) because all it could think about was how to compensate itself for the deficit that was transferred to it.”

 

He commended President Aline Hanson for picking up the QPC from where he left off, noting the government had tried to get the QPC option removed from the “biased” State Council.

 

The Collectivité at the time took the matter to court but the State dealt with it at a glacial pace over the years, that is until the State Council—the complaint had already passed to the Administrative Court of Paris which decided it was not qualified to make a decision--made a momentous announcement on April 13, 2016, agreeing that the matter was serious enough to be referred to the Constitutional Court.

 

Richardson described the positive State Council decision as “a major hurdle out of the way.”

 

“Today I don’t foresee the Constitutional Court taking any other decision than validating the points presented by the Collectivité because they are grounded in constitutional elements, he said. “I don’t want to prejudge but I’m convinced it will say the constitution was not respected, and the organic law that created the Collectivité was not respected either.

“The organic law was not only voted by Parliament but the Constitutional Court reviewed it to make sure it was in line with the constitution. In it was financial neutrality, transfer of means (financial), and transfer of competences.”

 

But he warned the impact of a decision in the Collectivité’s favour will have far reaching consequences.

 

“We’re talking about around 11.6 million euros per year, plus the negative balance of 634,326 per year the Collectivité is paying the State since 2008, all this has to be paid back retroactively. That’s over 100 million euros to come back to the Collectivité over the past nine years.

 

“Now because of the dishonesty on the part of the magistrates of the Commission d’ Evaluation des Charges and of the State Council itself pertaining to St. Martin, I think the State, instead of repaying the 12 million euros, may go back to zero by doing a re-evaluation.

 

“And we might see emerging some fictitious expenses that will erode that 12 million euros which for the State out of its budget is a substantial amount. I’m sure the State administration will do everything in its power not to pay back this kind of money. The battle is not going to end on the Constitutional Court decision.”

 

He noted in 2009 the French Government had already estimated it had to compensate the Collectivité with 5 million euros, after the Octroi de Mer from Guadeloupe was suppressed in 2008.

 

“That tells you that France knew it had to compensate.”

 

Richardson said the Collectivité with respect to the constitution must have the mind set to challenge and stand firm in the months to come to not be fooled again.

 

He added in his view the State granted the new status to St. Martin begrudgingly and everything was done to hamper the success of St. Martin evolving positively into Article 74.

 

“St. Barths was never an issue for the State but St. Martin with all its social problems, unemployment, would always have to be compensated. It was obvious to me at the level of the French administration the task was to make St. Martin fail, to prevent other overseas territories wanting the same status. France doesn’t want to see its powers taken away and granted to Collectivités.”

 

The Constitutional Court has three months to make its decision.

 

The Daily Herald