T

he Supreme Court said on Thursday that it would welcome the Corruption Eradication Commission'€™s (KPK) initiative to file a case-review motion against a recent court verdict allowing graft suspects to challenge their legal status at courts across the country through the pretrial mechanism.

As of Thursday, more graft suspects had filed pretrial motions at South Jakarta District Court following that court'€™s decision to accept Comr. Gen. Budi Gunawan'€™s pretrial petition last week, which consequently ordered the antigraft body to stop its investigation into the three-star police general. This was in spite of the fact the Criminal Law Procedures Code (KUHAP) grants no authority to a judge to void a suspect'€™s legal status.

Graft suspect and former religious affairs minister Suryadharma Ali followed Budi'€™s footsteps by filing a pretrial motion on Tuesday, while other graft suspects, including Democratic Party co-founder Sutan Bhatoegana and former Bangkalan regent Fuad Amin, were preparing pretrial proposals.

The KPK is expected to file a case-review motion with the Supreme Court following the refusal by South Jakarta District Court to register the antigraft body'€™s proposal for a cassation petition challenging the controversial pretrial ruling at the Supreme Court.

Supreme Court justice Suhaidi said the chances of the KPK being able to challenge Budi'€™s pretrial decision using a case-review mechanism would hinge on whether the South Jakarta District Court would process it.

'€œIt depends on the court because it will determine whether or not the case-review petition can move forward,'€ Suhadi said on Thursday.

KUHAP stipulates that a case-review petition should be filed first with the lower court. The lower court then reviews whether or not the proposal meets criteria such as the availability of new evidence or arguments, or whether judges wrongly interpreted the law, before it submits the petition to the Supreme Court for a hearing.

Many experts have said the KPK'€™s move to file a petition had no legal grounds as KUHAP stipulated that only convicts or their heirs can file a case review.

But others say that the KPK could use a Supreme Court circular from 2014 that stipulated that a pretrial ruling could be challenged only if it was believed that judges had strayed too far in their interpretation of the law. Legal experts have said that Budi'€™s controversial pretrial ruling was flawed in such a way.

The 2009 Law on judicial power also stipulates that relevant parties can file case reviews under certain conditions, for example, the discovery of new evidence or mistaken application of the law by a judge.

In 2007, the Attorney General'€™s Office (AGO) set a precedent that prosecutors could challenge a ruling using a case-review mechanism. At that time, the AGO filed a case review to challenge the acquittal of Pollycarpus Budihari Priyanto, who had been convicted of murdering human rights activist Munir Said Thalib. At the case review hearing the AGO was successful in increasing the sentence to 20 years.

Miko Ginting of the Center for Indonesian Law and Policy Studies (PSHK) said the Supreme Court must use its authority as the highest judicial body to rectify the controversial decision in Budi'€™s case, to prevent other graft suspects resorting to the same move.

'€œThe KPK must step up its lobbying of the Supreme Court to urge the court to approve its cassation proposal. A case review is the best thing as there is still hope for a cassation because it is the Supreme Court'€™s duty to right the wrong in the controversial ruling through a cassation mechanism,'€ Miko said.