Ahok's lawyer Edi Danggur said, according to the law, a qualified witness was someone who directly saw, experienced and heard the incident.

"All witnesses presented on Jan. 3 and Jan. 10 didn’t meet that qualification," Edi said in a press conference at Ahok's campaign headquarters on Thursday. 

He went on to say that all the witnesses that testified had been made aware of Ahok's alleged blasphemous comment from other people through SMS text messages or Whatsapp conversations. 

Therefore, they should be deemed as "testimonium de auditu" (a witness who hears a testimony from others) and there testimonies should be set aside because they were not credible, Edi said. 

(Read also: Ahok's lawyers criticize witness' background, noting him as Agus supporter)

Edi added that his team also doubted the witnesses' backgrounds. Based on their research, the lawyers found that the witness Irena Handono, a former Catholic-nun-turned-Muslim-preacher, had lied about her educational background, Edi said. 

Previously, it was revealed in court that another witness named Gus Joy had pretended to be a lawyer.

"In accordance with Article 185(6) of the Criminal Law Procedures Code, judges cannot take into account testimonies from unreliable witnesses," Edi explained. (jun)

Popular

Indonesia not affected by Southeast Asia-wide heat wave: BMKG

Residents fear for safety as Mount Ruang volcano erupts

In defense of Indonesian democracy