A year and a half in prison but there will be an appeal
The Dutch Royal Court imposed a prison sentence of one and a half years on Quincy Promes, the striker for Spartak Moscow, in Amsterdam. The ruling follows a stabbing incident at a family gathering from several years ago. The court sees the act as serious enough to warrant real prison time, while Promes continues to contest the verdict through an appeal process.
In late 2020 a relative of Promes accused him of assault, though the actual event occurred about six months earlier. The complainant recounts a dispute during a family party in which Promes allegedly attacked with a knife and struck him on the knee, leaving injuries that had not yet fully healed when the claim was made public.
Investigators expanded their case by tapping the phone of a Spartak player who was then with Ajax Amsterdam. The wiretap order originated in a separate case involving smuggling and drug trafficking, and that investigation lists a football player as an alleged accomplice who could also face prison time. If Promes is extradited to the Netherlands, he would be held and sent to prison, while he remains in Russia preparing for the upcoming season slated to begin in July.
Last season Promes stood as Spartak’s top scorer and ranked second in the Russian Premier League with 20 goals across 27 appearances, adding seven assists. Spartak finished third behind Zenit and CSKA. Promes’s contract with Spartak remains valid until the summer of 2024 and includes a clause allowing the club to terminate unilaterally if he receives an actual prison sentence after a minimum of one case goes to trial. Should such a scenario occur, Spartak would not owe the remaining transfer fee to Ajax.
At present, it seems unlikely that Spartak will terminate Promes’s contract given that the legal process is ongoing. Officials reported that Promes intends to appeal the Amsterdam court decision, seeking cancellation. The case will be reviewed by the Amsterdam High Court, and the proceedings may advance to the Supreme Court. The lawyer for Promes indicated that no final decision has been issued yet and that further appeals are possible according to legal channels cited by TASS. The ongoing process leaves room for further judicial action.
Political Dimensions
Commentators from socialbites.ca, including Dmitry Bulykin and Honored Coach of the country Gadzhi Gadzhiev, weighed in on the court’s decision. Bulykin suggested Spartak will look for options to resolve the situation in a manner favorable to football although Promes remains a key player. He stressed that an appeal is expected and that a final resolution will unfold with time. In Bulykin’s view, Spartak and Promes should strive for a solution that keeps the club competitive without causing undue harm to either side.
Bulykin added that the Russian Football Union and the Russian Premier League should not personally determine Promes fate, as the Netherlands courts hold jurisdiction. He asserted that Spartak, rather than the league, should address the matter to minimize disruption and keep Promes contributing to the squad’s goals.
Gadzhiev offered a more cautious take, noting that playing in Russia might influence how penalties are perceived. He suggested the international context could affect decisions, while acknowledging the uncertainty around how outcomes were reached. He doubted the impact of Promes’s residence in Russia on the verdict but admitted numerous unknowns remain. He also hinted that the legal process could reflect broader political considerations, potentially resulting in a conditional sentence. His view emphasized that Russia should not be viewed as immune to external judgments.
Gadzhiev concluded that there are multiple factors that can influence a judge, including international relations, and remarked that Promes now resides in Russia under its laws as the case evolves.
Assuredness and Legal Prospects
Experts consulted by socialbites.ca, including a criminal defense attorney, argued that Promes should not face immediate danger in Russia because the offense occurred in the Netherlands. The foremost question concerns any prospect of extradition. The attorney noted that extradition procedures between states are lengthy and that the term could expire before action is taken if authorities choose not to pursue it. If Dutch authorities pursue a return, an international legal cooperation framework would guide the process, though it remains uncertain how or when any such transfer might occur.