~Justice Minister says no formal suspension occurred and the investigation was fast-tracked due to a police shortage.~
PHILIPSBURG:--- Member of Parliament Lyndon Lewis on Wednesday demanded clarity from Minister of Justice Nathalie Tackling over who authorized the removal from active duty of the police officer involved in the school bus incident, while questioning whether officers facing different investigations are being treated equally within the Police Force of St Maarten.
Lewis raised the matter at the opening of Public Meeting No. 21 of the 2025–2026 parliamentary year, ahead of continued deliberations with the Justice Minister on road safety concerns and other justice-related matters.
MPs Lewis, Omar Ottley and Francisco Lacroes requested the meeting, originally convened on July 7, 2026. It was subsequently adjourned to allow the Minister time to prepare answers to questions submitted during the first round.
Lewis began by addressing the viral video showing a police officer correcting a student on a school bus. He acknowledged that the officer had not been formally suspended but noted that the officer had been taken off active duty while an investigation was conducted.
“Who gave the authorization for the officer not to be on the job while the investigation is going on?” Lewis asked.
The MP also questioned the checks and balances KPSM management used to decide whether officers under investigation should remain on active duty.
Lewis referred to what he described as other serious cases involving police officers, including an officer whom he said had been convicted in connection with the abuse of his wife, who is also a colleague, but remained on duty.
He also pointed to the investigation into the St. Peters police-involved shooting and questioned why the officers connected to that matter remained on the job while the officer involved in the school bus incident was initially taken off duty.
“How is it that a police officer who dealt with a student is not on the job?” Lewis asked. “I really would like to get some clarity on that situation.”
Tackling confirms officer returned to work
Responding to Lewis, Tackling confirmed that the officer involved in the school bus incident had already returned to work.
The Minister stressed that no formal suspension had taken place.
According to Tackling, authorities learned of the incident late Friday afternoon, shortly before the weekend. The minor's parents then filed a formal complaint, which police management was legally obligated to investigate.
The Minister said authorities attempted to complete the preliminary investigation as quickly as possible so that the officer could return to duty.
“The officer in question actually returned to work yesterday,” Tackling told Parliament, adding that he was already working during the early morning hours.
Tackling also disclosed that a meeting took place between the minor’s parents and the police on Tuesday.
However, the Minister did not directly identify who authorized the officer’s temporary removal from active duty, which was one of Lewis’s central questions.
Minister Corrects Public Narrative: Student Was 13, Not 17
Tackling also used the parliamentary meeting to correct widespread social media claims that the student involved was 17 years old.
The Minister confirmed that the child was 13.
“I’ve seen a lot of people on Facebook talking about the fact that this was a 17-year-old. The young man in question was not and is not 17 years old. He is actually 13 years old,” Tackling said.
She said the student’s correct age places the incident in a different context, particularly because some members of the public had used the claim that he was 17 to argue that he was nearly an adult and should have known better.
Tackling had explained during the Council of Ministers press briefing a day earlier that the internal investigation was not based solely on the brief interaction captured in the viral video.
Police management was also concerned that the child was removed from the school bus, placed in a police vehicle and later left alone at a bus stop.
The required procedure, according to the Minister, was to take the child to the police station and invite his parents to discuss his conduct. That procedure was not followed.
The parents subsequently filed a formal complaint, triggering the internal investigation.
Officers in Shooting Case Were Also Removed from Streets
Addressing Lewis’s questions about other police investigations, Tackling said officers involved in the separate police shooting case were also temporarily taken off the streets.
According to the Minister, those officers were placed on desk duty and received psychological or psychiatric assistance following the incident.
They were allowed to return to active duty after KPSM completed its internal investigation.
The matter has since become the subject of a criminal investigation being handled by the Public Prosecutor’s Office.
“We are, of course, awaiting the outcome of that criminal investigation and seeing where that goes accordingly,” Tackling said.
The Minister maintained that the established internal procedures have not changed. She said police management attempted to handle the school bus case pragmatically and conclude the preliminary investigation quickly.
Police Shortage Influenced Speed of Investigation
Tackling told Parliament that Sint Maarten’s shortage of police officers makes it especially difficult whenever an officer must be removed from active duty while an investigation is conducted.
“We have a shortage of police officers, and every time we have to send one of them home pending an investigation, it breaks my heart, and it hurts me from a public-order perspective,” the Minister said.
She added that officers also do not want to be sent home while investigations are pending.
Tackling said the Ministry and police management will continue attempting to complete such investigations as quickly as possible so officers can either return to duty or face the appropriate next steps based on the findings.
The Minister’s response confirmed that the officer involved in the school bus incident was never formally suspended, that the student was 13 rather than 17, that the parents filed a formal complaint, and that the officer has since returned to active duty.
