The Ghost Employees of Aruba: When Willing Participation Isn’t Innocent

In a democracy, public trust is currency. And in small island nations like Aruba, where government institutions are both omnipresent and deeply personal, that currency can be spent quickly-and irresponsibly.

Two rulings from the  Court of First Instance of Aruba – ECLI:NL:OGEAA:2025:1 and ECLI:NL:OGEAA:2025:2 – make one thing painfully clear: systemic abuse of public funds isn’t always the result of corrupt leaders alone. Sometimes, ordinary citizens knowingly play their part. The so-called Flamingo Case focused on two individuals who accepted political appointments, collected full salaries, and performed no work whatsoever-for years. These weren’t passive victims of a broken system. They were willing participants in it.

Salaries Without Service

Both defendants were appointed as liaison officers at the Ministry of Spatial Development, Infrastructure, and Environment (ROIM). According to the judgments, their appointments were made via “des ministers” decisions-a political shortcut that bypassed all standard hiring procedures. There was no vacancy, no interview, no job description, and, as it turned out, no actual work.

Each received a salary of over Afl. 4,000 per month, plus allowances. One collected Afl. 84,413 during his appointment; the other took in Afl. 131,149. And yet neither performed a single day of government work. One of the men admitted that he never received a government email address, access badge, or even a desk. He spent most of the period living in Colombia, which he described as “a long vacation.” As he told investigators:

“I got nothing from the government: no number, no office, no desk, not even a pen-just a salary.”

The other defendant also never reported for duty. Ministry staff had never seen him, and the court concluded he had no office, no duties, and no record of any contribution. Both men continued to collect their government pay-fully aware that they were doing nothing in return.

Not Just a Broken System

There’s no question that the government who orchestrated these appointments acted improperly. The court explicitly called it political patronage: jobs created not to serve the public, but to reward political allies, with no expectation of actual work. But here’s where things get more complicated.

Under basic employment law, it’s the employer’s duty to provide work. If they don’t-for example, due to internal delays or poor planning-employees are still entitled to their wages. In fact, in many cases it’s not just permissible but mandatory to pay salaries, even when there’s temporarily no work to be performed. That’s fair. Employees shouldn’t suffer for failures of the organization.

But can that principle still apply when there was never a real job to begin with?

These appointments weren’t poorly managed-they were illegitimate from the start. There was no genuine intent to assign work. One contract even stated explicitly that no salary would be due if no work was performed. That clause, like everything else, was ignored. This wasn’t a case of civil servants waiting for assignments. It was a case of individuals knowingly entering into fake roles where no work was expected-or delivered. That distinction matters. Legally. Ethically. Financially.

Ghost Workers Are Not Victims

It’s tempting to view these individuals as pawns in a political game. But the court didn’t see it that way-and neither should we. Both men were convicted of fraud, and rightly so. They weren’t tricked. They weren’t coerced. They saw an opportunity and took it.

When someone offers you a government paycheck with no duties, the ethical-and legal-response is to walk away. Not to cash in. Yes, the government may have abused his power. But the people who accepted these appointments made a conscious choice. That choice has consequences.

Crime Doesn’t Pay

In addition to their criminal convictions, both now faced (ontnemingszaken) separate forfeiture proceedings initiated by the Public Prosecutor to reclaim the money they unlawfully received. The prosecution was  successful, both have been sentenced to pay back their respective illict earnings.

That matters. Because justice isn’t just about punishment. It’s about restitution. It sends a message: crime doesn’t pay-even when it wears a tie and sits quietly on a government payroll.

A Pattern Hiding in Plain Sight

But let’s be honest: these two aren’t exceptions. They’re symptoms of a deeper problem.

Over the past few decades, dozens of similar political appointments have been made in Aruba. Individuals handed contracts or monthly salaries-not for real jobs, but as political payback. Sometimes for loyalty already given, other times for support promised in the future.

And much like the two individuals in the Flamingo case, many of these so-called “employees” never set foot in a government building. They did nothing. They produced nothing. They simply collected. So here’s the question we must ask: Why isn’t the Public Prosecutor looking into these other cases? Or does the prosecution pretend that those other (dozens) of appointments never existed?

If fraud is fraud-and public money is public trust-then every ghost contract should be investigated. Every sham job should be exposed. Every illegitimate salary must be accounted for. Because selective enforcement is no justice at all.

A Shared Responsibility

The Flamingo case is more than a scandal. It’s a mirror. It shows us not only how power can be abused, but how easily ordinary people can be co-opted into that abuse.

Yes, the government must be held to account. But citizens must hold themselves to a higher standard too. If someone offers you a government job with no responsibilities and no expectations, the red flags should be obvious. When you accept it anyway, you are no longer a victim. You are an accomplice. Democracy doesn’t just need clean leadership. It needs honest participation. Because public service is not a reward-it’s a responsibility.

Toward Integrity

This case offers Aruba a choice: confront the past, clean up the present, and build a system of integrity-or look the other way and let the cycle continue. Ghost jobs are not harmless. They bleed public funds, weaken institutions, and erode public trust. And when public money becomes a private reward, trust dies quietly. And democracy follows close behind. Jobs must be real. Work must be done. And when it isn’t, the people deserve to know why-and who benefited.

See you next week.
In the meantime, visit www.lincolngomez.com for all my blogs and podcasts.