Girigorie Clarifies High Court Ruling: Illegal Entry Alone No Longer Grounds for Automatic Detention, but Government Still Has Legal Tools to Protect Borders
WILLEMSTAD – Following the July 30, 2025, ruling of the High Court in the case of two undocumented Venezuelans, various individuals and organizations have claimed that the court determined the Government of Curaçao may no longer detain people arriving illegally by boat. This has led to questions about whether those caught entering the country this way must now be released — and what this means for Curaçao’s ability to protect its borders.
Member of Parliament for the opposition PAR, Quincy Girigorie, addressed these misconceptions, stressing that the High Court did not make such a determination.
“It is simply not true that people who arrive illegally by boat can no longer be detained,” Girigorie told Curaçao Chronicle. “The ruling is more nuanced and does not remove the government’s ability to protect our borders.”
What the ruling actually says
Girigorie explained that during the case, the Ministry based its decision to detain the undocumented individuals primarily on the fact that they had entered the country illegally, in this instance by boat. Under current practice, anyone attempting to enter illegally is detained pending deportation. By contrast, those who entered legally — for example, through the airport — but overstayed their legal period of stay are not automatically detained; instead, they are often placed under a “meldplicht” (reporting requirement), which obliges them to provide contact details to Immigration and report in person once a week to confirm they remain available for deportation.
The High Court concluded that this distinction has no legal basis. The law makes no differentiation between undocumented persons who entered legally and those who entered illegally. Therefore, detention cannot be justified solely on the basis of illegal entry. In line with both international treaties and Curaçao’s constitutional framework, local laws must clearly regulate the grounds for detention — including in detention facilities — and this clarity does not currently exist. As a result, the court found the government’s current practice unlawful.
Detention still possible under specific conditions
However, the ruling does not prohibit detention altogether. The High Court agreed with the government’s argument that a person who enters the country illegally, without valid identification, without a fixed residence, without a stable source of income, and without family ties in Curaçao:
Represents a potential threat to public order and national security; and
Carries a high risk of absconding before deportation.
The court ruled these are sufficiently strong and legitimate grounds for detention.
Detention must be a last resort
Girigorie emphasized that despite these valid arguments, the court stressed detention should be considered a “last resort.” The Ministry must assess the personal circumstances of each individual case to determine whether detention would be disproportionate. For example, someone with a chronic illness that cannot be properly treated in detention should not be held.
Balanced decision, not an open door
In summary, Girigorie described the court’s decision as both legally sound and balanced — it confirms there is no legal basis for automatically detaining people simply because they entered illegally, but also affirms the government’s strong grounds to protect Curaçao’s coasts from irregular migration when there is a threat to public order, national security, or a flight risk. The government is required to consider less restrictive, more proportionate measures where personal circumstances warrant it.
“This is not a green light for human smugglers,” Girigorie stressed. “It is a call for the government to use detention responsibly and consider alternatives such as the ‘meldplicht’ where possible.”
The MP concluded that Curaçao must work towards fair treatment of undocumented individuals — including access to legal counsel, healthy activities during detention, and regimes different from standard prison incarceration — while continuing to safeguard its borders and ensuring that everyone entering the country does so legally and in accordance with national regulations.
