Court rules Syrian man was rightfully denied entry to Bonaire

KRALENDIJK – The Court of First Instance of Bonaire, Sint Eustatius and Saba has ruled that a Syrian man was rightfully denied entry to Bonaire. The man intended to settle on the island and find work, but did not hold the required provisional residence permit (MVV). His appeal against the temporary detention following his arrival was also declared unfounded.

The man travelled on 20 February 2026 from the Netherlands to Bonaire carrying a Dutch refugee passport and a valid Dutch residence permit. Upon arrival he stated that he wished to live and work on Bonaire. Because he intended to stay for longer than three months, he was required under the BES Admission and Expulsion Act to hold a provisional residence permit — which he did not have.

The court emphasised that Bonaire, despite its status as a special municipality of the Netherlands, has its own immigration admission policy. A Dutch residence permit therefore does not automatically confer the right to reside or work on Bonaire.

No right to tourist admission either

The minister then assessed whether the man could be admitted to Bonaire as a tourist. According to the court, he did not meet those requirements either. He had only 545 dollars in cash and approximately 1,600 dollars in his bank account. He also had no return ticket and had not arranged any accommodation. Under the applicable rules, a visitor must be able to demonstrate sufficient financial means, with a guideline of approximately 1,000 dollars per week.

The man argued that he had already paid 75 dollars in tourist tax and could therefore reasonably assume he was permitted to enter Bonaire. The court rejected this argument. The collection of tourist tax is separate from the Royal Netherlands Marechaussee’s assessment of whether someone meets the conditions for entry.

Detention lawful

Following the entry refusal, the man remained in a designated area at the airport until his return flight to the Netherlands. The court found this to be lawful, as he had no place of residence on Bonaire and no return flight was available on the same day.

The court did note that the Royal Netherlands Marechaussee could have acted more carefully in facilitating access to legal assistance. However, the court found this had no bearing on the outcome of the case, as the man filed an appeal just one day later and was given ample opportunity during the proceedings to present his position.

Appeal partially inadmissible

Regarding the part of the appeal relating to the temporary confiscation of his travel and identity documents, the court declared itself without jurisdiction. Under the law, that measure is not equated with a decision against which an appeal can be lodged. The remaining appeals were declared unfounded, meaning the entry refusal and detention remain in force.