KRALENDIJK – In the murder case on Saba, relatives of firefighter Sheldon Johnson are claiming nearly $28,000 in damages. Attorney Sjamira Roseburg argues that the case exposes a fundamental legal difference between European Netherlands and Caribbean Netherlands. The court will deliver its verdict on 25 June.
During the substantive hearing of the so-called Papaya case, Roseburg requested compensation on behalf of several relatives. Whether the claim will be fully granted is uncertain, because the legal provision for affection damages, compensation for the emotional suffering of next of kin, does not exist in Caribbean Netherlands as it does in European Netherlands.
According to Roseburg, that is precisely where the problem lies. "If we look at the Netherlands, affection damages are legally regulated. Here, that regulation is absent. That means that next of kin on the BES islands end up in a different legal position" said the attorney.
PTSS following the shooting
Part of the claim relates to Sheldon Johnson’s partner, who was present during the shooting. According to Roseburg, medical documentation has been submitted showing that she developed psychological complaints consistent with post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD).
In addition, shots were also fired in her direction, according to the attorney. "Four shell casings were found, two of which struck the victim. She maintains that shots were fired at her as well. The fact that she was not injured does not mean there were no consequences" said Roseburg.
Gap in the law
According to Roseburg, the case demonstrates that legislation within the Kingdom is not uniform. "In the Netherlands, there is a clear regulation for affection damages. Here there is not. That makes it more difficult to legally translate the emotional suffering of relatives into compensation" she said.
Should the court declare the claims inadmissible or reject them, Roseburg does not rule out further proceedings. "Then we will have to look at additional legal steps. This case shows that there may be a gap in the law."
Family travels to Bonaire
The attorney emphasises that the presence of the family during the court case was important. Because the case was handled on Bonaire rather than Saba for security reasons, family members had to travel to attend the hearing.
The Court made resources available so that two family members could travel from Saba to Bonaire and stay overnight. Other family members received support from the Public Entity Saba to be able to attend the proceedings.
According to Roseburg, this underlines how great the impact of the case has been on the family and the community of Saba.
