The suspect I.M.P. (21 years old) in the Last Call case appeared before the Court of Appeal again yesterday. The case concerns the manslaughter of the girl Sayuri Petronia, who died on 4 June 2021 after being struck by bullets fired from a firearm by P.
The loss of Sayuri has left deep scars on her family and on the community. Her father regularly appears in the media to draw attention to the case and to express the ongoing grief. The Public Prosecutor’s Office acknowledges the suffering of Sayuri’s relatives, who have the right to recognition and respect.
At the time of the offense, P. was a minor but was, by way of exception, sentenced in 2022 under adult criminal law to nine years’ imprisonment and a TBS measure with compulsory treatment for manslaughter, multiple counts of attempted murder, violent theft, and threats.
In the 2023 appeal, the Court of Appeal did not apply the exception and sentenced the suspect under juvenile criminal law to four years of juvenile detention and imposed the PIJ measure.
The Public Prosecutor’s Office filed for cassation with the Supreme Court (Hoge Raad) against this ruling, because this combination of sanctions is explicitly prohibited under the Criminal Code.
In 2024, the Supreme Court therefore overturned the Court’s 2023 decision, but only with respect to the sentencing. That is the matter now under review, and that is what was addressed by the Court yesterday. Two key questions must be answered: Should sentencing follow juvenile criminal law, as is the general rule, or should adult criminal law be applied as an exception?
A sentence serves several purposes, including retribution. Retribution means that society and the victim’s relatives receive acknowledgment for the harm done to them. This is clearly reflected in the words of Sayuri’s father, who emphasizes that even a life sentence would not be enough to compensate for the loss of his daughter.
However, when imposing a sentence, the characteristics of the defendant must always be taken into account. For a defendant like P., who suffers from a severe personality disorder leading to violent behavior and a high risk of reoffending, imprisonment alone is insufficient. In such cases, specialized forensic treatment is necessary to prevent the defendant from posing a future danger to society after serving his sentence, regardless of its length.
The challenge in Aruba is that no specialized clinic exists for either the TBS measure or the PIJ measure. This presents a major difficulty in ensuring the protection of society.
The Public Prosecutor’s Office has argued that adult criminal law should apply. Given the seriousness of the offenses and the substantial risk of reoffending, it deemed it necessary to impose both a prison sentence and a measure. The prosecution demanded eight years’ imprisonment combined with a TBS measure with compulsory treatment. The Court of Appeal will issue its decision on 17 December 2025.