St. Martin News Network

A criminological perspective on crime in Sint Maarten: Part 1.

By Marcus Pantophlet

Law Enforcement Professional | BSc in Criminology | 15+ Years of Experience

marcuspantophlet19032026 With more than 15 years of law enforcement experience and a Bachelor of Science in Criminology, I believe Sint Maarten's current crime situation requires us to look beyond individual criminal incidents and examine the broader social and socioeconomic conditions that contribute to crime.

The recent series of robberies reported across Sint Maarten in September 2026 should concern all of us. While official monthly statistics are necessary before declaring a statistically confirmed increase in the crime rate, the frequency and nature of the reported robberies clearly warrant examining what is happening beneath the surface.

One of the most important factors is socioeconomic pressure.

Sint Maarten can see economic activity and tourism growth while ordinary residents simultaneously face rising cost-of-living pressures. Housing, food, utilities, transportation, and other necessities continue to strain household budgets.

When people experience a widening gap between what they want or need and what they believe they can realistically achieve through legitimate means, strain can develop.

That does not mean poverty creates criminals. The overwhelming majority of people experiencing financial hardship do not commit crimes.

However, criminology teaches us that socioeconomic strain can become one contributing factor when combined with other vulnerabilities.

The impact on our youth

This is where I am particularly concerned.

Our young people are growing up in an environment where they are constantly exposed to images of wealth, status and material success, particularly through social media. At the same time, some young people face challenges involving education, employment, family circumstances and economic opportunity.

When legitimate pathways to success appear distant while illegal pathways appear immediately accessible, the risk increases that some young people will be influenced by peers or individuals already involved in criminal activity.

This is where social learning and peer influence become important.

Criminal behavior can become normalized.

A young person may begin with relatively minor offending, become exposed to older or more experienced offenders, and gradually become involved in more serious criminal activity.

That is why the involvement of minors in recent property-crime incidents should concern us deeply. It should force us to ask not only how we punish young offenders, but why they reached the point of offending in the first place.

The socioeconomic cost of crime

The consequences of crime extend far beyond the victim who is robbed.

Businesses face financial losses and increased security costs. Employees can experience fear and psychological trauma. Residents change their routines because they fear becoming victims.

For Sint Maarten, another important consideration is that our economy depends heavily on tourism.

Our reputation as a safe destination matters.

If residents, tourists, and investors begin to see the island as increasingly unsafe, the consequences can extend to tourism, business confidence, investment, and employment.

Crime therefore becomes not only a law-enforcement issue but also an economic and social-development issue.

Accountability and prevention must go hand in hand.

Sint Maarten needs a serious, evidence-based crime strategy that protects victims, supports our law-enforcement officers, holds offenders accountable and—most importantly—creates legitimate opportunities for our young people before criminal networks create opportunities for them.

The September 2026 robberies should not simply be another series of headlines.

They should be a wake-up call.

Marcus Pantophlet

Law Enforcement Professional

Bachelor of Science in Criminology

MP Lacroes, Who pays when the toll is on you?

Dear Editor,

lacroesballots28092026 MP Francisco Lacroes has suggested charging motorists 25 or 50 cents to use the Simpson Bay Causeway. He argues that many people crossing the bridge live on the French side, while Sint Maarten pays the cost.

Before he proposes another charge for ordinary people, Mr. Lacroes should tell taxpayers what they have paid for his parliamentary travel.

How many Parlatino and other overseas trips has he taken? What did each flight, hotel stay, and per diem cost? Where are his reports on those trips? What recommendations did he bring home, and what tangible benefit has Sint Maarten received? Parliament lists him on Parlatino committees and has reported his participation in an overseas workshop. Taxpayers are entitled to the costs and results, trip by trip. sxmparliament.org

If 25 cents from a causeway user matters to the public purse, every guilder spent on parliamentary travel matters too. Mr. Lacroes should explain why residents should face a new toll before he has publicly accounted for the value of those trips.

There is also the question of bus and taxi licenses issued while he served in the TEATT minister’s cabinet. The Integrity Chamber found serious failures in the ministry’s 2023 licensing process, including applications handled outside official deadlines, incomplete files and the absence of a Public Transportation Committee. www.integritychamber.sx

Mr. Lacroes should tell the public how many taxi and bus licenses were issued during his tenure, what role he played, and who approved them. He should also explain the remarkable increase in his personal vote: records show 85 votes in 2020 and 312 in the January 2024 election. He received 236 votes in the August 2024 election. What does he attribute that rise to, particularly after the licensing period? This is a question he can answer directly; a change in vote totals alone doesn't explain why people voted for him. sxmelections.com

And if his principle is that people from one side of the island should pay when they use infrastructure maintained by the other, has he thought through where that leads?

Dutch-side taxis, tour buses and VIP transport operators take paying passengers to Marigot, Orient Bay and other French-side destinations. They use French-side roads and public spaces to earn their fares. Should the Collectivité impose an hourly fee on vehicles stopping at the Marigot waterfront? Should it charge tour operators whose passengers use Orient Bay because French-side authorities must maintain public areas and clean up after visitors?

The Collectivité has already reorganized access to the Marigot waterfront taxi facilities and described an annual contribution for their use. That makes Mr. Lacroes’s proposal more than an abstract argument: cross-border transport operators already have reason to pay attention to how each side charges for shared tourism activity. www.com-saint-martin.fr

Sint Maarten and Saint-Martin are one island. People cross the border to work, take their children to school, visit family, shop and earn a living. Once politicians begin treating every crossing as an opportunity to collect money from someone on the “other side,” the charges will not stop with the causeway.

Mr. Lacroes should publish his travel costs and reports, answer questions about the licensing period and his vote increase, and provide an actual calculation of what a 25- or 50-cent toll would raise after collection costs. Until then, he should stop asking residents to pay another fee for moving around their own island.

Sincerely,

Marcella Samson