Tight-lipped Yusril answers AGO’s summons over website case

Former justice and human rights minister Yusril Ihza Mahendra answered the Attorney General’s Office’s summons for questioning on Wednesday, but only to tell the prosecutors he would remain tight-lipped until the Constitutional Court issued a ruling on the AGO.

Yusril has been named a suspect in an alleged corruption case involving an online registration service, run by a private company, at the Justice and Human Rights Ministry. “I answered questions related to Hartono, such as where, when and in what context I came to know him. But I refused to answer questions linked to substantial matters like the contract between the ministry’s cooperative and PT SRD [Sarana Rekatama Dinamika],” Yusril said.

He was referring to Hartono Tanoesoedibjo, the owner of PT SRD, which operated the online registration service, also named a suspect.

Hartono was to be questioned on Wednesday but did not show up.

Yusril said he was waiting for the Constitutional Court’s ruling on a judicial review after filing a legal challenge against incumbent Attorney General Hendarman Supandji. The decision is expected next week.

“Later, after the Constitutional Court decides on the legality of the current attorney general, I will come for questioning on the AGO’s request. If the Court states that he is legal and all his policies are legal, I will answer these questions.”

Hartono’s lawyer, Andi F. Simangunsong, said Wednesday that last week his team had sent the AGO a letter, conveying his client’s promise to undergo questioning on Sept. 20.

Yulianto, the head of the AGO’s investigating team, said that in the questioning session his team had tried to clarify Yusril’s involvement in the case.

The evidence, he claimed, included a photograph of Yusril along with Hartono and his brother, Hary Tanoesoedibjo, the president commissioner of PT Bhakti Investama, which was said to have provided a loan to PT SRD, during the signing of the contract in 2001. The AGO will continue the investigation without waiting for the Constitutional Court’s decision on the status of the AGO.

“In this investigation we use a criminal law perspective instead of that of public administration law. At this point we have a difference of opinion [with Yusril],” he said. (lnd)