TheJakartaPost
Please Update your browser
Your browser is out of date, and may not be compatible with our website. A list of the most popular web browsers can be found below.
Just click on the icons to get to the download page.
Popular Reads
Top Results
No results found. Please check your search term and try again
Can't find what you're looking for?
View all search results
Popular Reads
Top Results
No results found. Please check your search term and try again
Can't find what you're looking for?
View all search resultsJudge's decision a result of renegade court process
Sarpin Rizaldi - (JP)While the court decision that has overturned the suspect status of National Police chief candidate Comr
Change text size
Gift Premium Articles
to Anyone
Share the best of The Jakarta Post with friends, family, or colleagues. As a subscriber, you can gift 3 to 5 articles each month that anyone can read—no subscription needed!
Sarpin Rizaldi - (JP)
While the court decision that has overturned the suspect status of National Police chief candidate Comr. Gen. Budi Gunawan may seem convincing, the Corruption Eradication Commission (KPK) can still propose an appeal as the decision is the brain child of a deviant legal process.
Former Supreme Court (MA) justice Djoko Sarwoko said that the decision was 'wrong' because it was the result of an abnormal court process.
He said that the Criminal Law Procedures Code (KUHAP) does not allow a pretrial hearing to challenge a suspect's status.
'Such a false decision cannot be implemented,' he said on Monday.
Djoko suggested that the antigraft body file a cassation with the Supreme Court to annul the decision.
South Jakarta District Court judge Sarpin Rizaldi approved Budi's pretrial petition on Monday, declaring that the suspect status slapped on Budi by the KPK was 'illegitimate.'
The KPK had named Budi a suspect for financial misdeeds in his capacity as head of the Career Development Bureau at the National Police headquarters from 2004 to 2006, where he amassed a total of Rp 95 billion (US$ 7.5 million).
Former Supreme Court chief justice Harifin Tumpa said Sarpin had violated his authority by ruling over an object that was not stipulated in the KUHAP.
'[Sarpin] has expanded the authority of a pretrial hearing. He said since [suspect status] is not regulated in the KUHAP, then a judge may include it [as a pretrial object]. This is wrong,' said Harifin.
In his ruling, Sarpin, who has previously been reported to the Judicial Commission (KY) for taking bribes to influence his decisions, declared that Budi could not be the subject of a KPK investigation as, when serving in the post, his status was not 'law enforcement officer' because the role did not grant him any investigative authority, adding that the KPK could only prosecute 'law enforcers and state officials' as stipulated by Article 11 of the KPK Law.
KY commissioner Taufiqurrohman Syahuri said the KY would investigate Sarpin's decision to find out whether the judge had violated ethical codes.
'A judge should not sacrifice his independence to make a decision,' Taufiqurrohman said.
Seemingly taken aback with the Monday decision, the antigraft body said it 'respects' the decision and would wait for the official document of the decision to take the next step.
KPK prevention unit deputy Johan Budi said on Monday that the KPK was considering filing a case review to challenge the decision at the Supreme Court, but it was still discussing what legal grounds it could use as justification.
'Whether a judicial review option which be taken will still need to be discussed further. We will soon issue an official statement on our stance,' Johan said.
KPK deputy chairman Bambang Widjojanto hinted that the decision still contained flaws as it failed to see that the KPK had charged Budi with receiving bribes when serving in a number of posts at the National Police, including as head of the Career Development Bureau, a possibility that opened the way for the KPK to launch a new investigation into Budi following the declaration of the court that the KPK's current investigation was 'invalid.'
'We will fight. We will try to look at the letter of investigation in which it was written that [the alleged crime] is related to his other posts in the past,' Bambang said.
Harifin suggested that the KPK file an objection with the Supreme Court regarding the pretrial decision.
He said a pretrial decision is binding but there was a chance that the Supreme Court could amend the decision.
Article 32 of the 2009 Supreme Court Law stipulates that it has the highest supervisory authority over the country's court system, including over the authority of judges.
'The MA has the highest authority, so if it decides that [Sarpin's decision] violates the judiciary system, then it can correct it,' he said.
