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.
Issue: Strong protest by Adnan Buyung Nasution
Jan
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!
J
an. 25, p. 7
We, Adnan Buyung Nasution and the Adnan Buyung Nasution & Partners Law Firm, lodge a strong protest against an article in The Jakarta Post on Friday, Jan. 21, on page 1, entitled “Gayus’ wild claims ‘won’t shield big fish’,” particularly the fifth paragraph, which stated: “Gayus’ lawyer Adnan Buyung Nasution, who received
Rp 10 billion (US$1.1 million) in legal fees for defending Gayus, unexpectedly turned on the taskforce, with which he had previously had good ties.”
The news is very tendentious without being based on facts, while it also harms our reputation and honor as professionals engaged in the legal profession for over 50 years.
We deeply regret the publication of such a report in this paper without checking it with us as the relevant lawyers.
We also regret that The Jakarta Post has not followed the open court session wholly and thoroughly. It should be noted that the decision on the Gayus case had nothing to do with the main case of the alleged judicial and tax mafia involving Rp 28 billion and Rp 74 billion owned by Gayus.
The recent verdict only concerned the “small-fry” case of the refund of tax objections submitted by
PT Surya Alam Tunggal worth “only” about Rp 570 million, and the cases of (lower-ranking National Police officers) such as Comr. Arafat, Adj. Comr. Sri Sumartini and (former South Tangerang District Court) judge Muhtadi Asnun.
Your comments:
“Gayus as an entry point.” So now, Adnan Buyung Nasution, will you try reaching the exit point to fully unveil the alleged judicial and tax mafias without claiming your usual professional fees?
Henry Manoe
Kupang, East Nusa Tenggara
Whilst I have certain sympathy with the case that you make, one fact remains unquestionable.
Unless your services were free or your fee was extremely small, and in-line with Gayus’s official salary, you accepted money knowing full well that it was illegally earned.
So, unless you are able to prove that your fees were kept within Gayus’s legal means, you are at least morally guilty.
Didi
Bandung
Bang Buyung, everybody can claim himself as good, as you called yourself “senior attorneys with unshakable integrity”, but ultimately the public is the arbiter.
Looking at Gayus’ statement after the verdict out of the court, he follows the song of Hotma Sitompul (a lawyer of Gayus’s wife). He’s been singing everywhere, and seems you like the song very much.
The way you behave to uphold the law, I am not convinced that both of you are attorneys with unshakable integrity, sirs.
Suri Adnyana
Bekasi
Adnan asserts that “Legal fees are actually a very private and confidential matter between attorneys and clients and reporting it for public consumption is unethical.”
On the contrary, Adnan, the cost of justice is a highly relevant topic for public scrutiny and discussion. If massive sums of money are needed to achieve justice, what social benefit is our justice system providing for the people?
Kevin James
Johore, Malaysia
Don’t try to be a hero by claiming to attempt to “unveil judicial mafia” — no one is buying it, sir.
The Jakarta Post might be subjective, but I think its subjectivity represents many Indonesians’ views.
Let us keep in mind that public opinion is not always “rational” opinion.
Tina
Jakarta
I do hope that The Jakarta Post publishes articles based on facts. I know for a fact that legal fees between the firm and clients are extremely confidential and there is no way to unveil.
However, seven years for Gayus disappoints a lot of people in the integrity of the country’s commitment to eradicating corruption. Yes, perhaps Pak Buyung has a point in regard to the justification of seven years stated in his letter, but we all know about Rp 28 billion which most of us consider unsolved.
I think now it is just a matter of why is this unsolved. Everyone may have an opinion on this, but the fact is it needs to be solved, whether it is getting the big fish or what have you.
I still admire you, Pak Buyung, but we have to admit that the public is disappointed with the verdict and how the case went in general.
Conor
Jakarta
Have you ever tried to take an economy-class train from Tanah Abang station, Pak Buyung? Try it once and see the real portrayal of Indonesian people, and let your eyes see how your defendant, Gayus H. Tambunan, betrayed them.
Gayus’ money belongs to them for their healthcare, education, and other development projects.
Izrail
Jakarta
