T

he hasty verdict and five-year prison sentence levied by the Temanggung District Court on blasphemy defendant Antonius Richmond Bawengan has drawn mixed responses from legal observers.

Tri Wuryaningsih, a social and political science lecturer at Purwokerto’s Jenderal Soedirman University,
said on Wednesday that the decision to hand down a verdict just moments after prosecutors read their sentence demand deprived the Antonius of a chance to defend himself.

Mobs destroyed three churches in Temanggung, Central Java, on Tuesday, after the verdict was issued.

“I perceive that the judges hastily handed down the sentence without considering various factors, such as [the case’s] social and legal aspects,” said.

Tri added that before passing sentence the judges should have heard testimony from parties interested in the social aspects of the case and the fate of the defendant. According to her, justice should not be sacrificed due to intimidation from external groups.

“The judges must consider various things for the sake of law and justice,” she said.

A law lecturer from the same university, Unggul Warsiadi, said a verdict handed down on the same day that a sentence demand was read could be legitimate as long as the evidence was complete and the defendant did not plea bargain or submit new evidence.

“It does not matter that the sentence was handed down the moment the sentence demand was delivered. It depends on the facts of law and especially on the defendant,” Unggul told The Jakarta Post.

He said a verdict need not always be handed down on another date since what was needed was complete facts and evidence.

“If everything is complete, judges can immediately hand down a sentence,” Unggul said.

“Defense is the right of the defendant and it can or not be used,” he said.

On the riots, Unggul said he could understand if the defendant did not plea bargain due to extraordinary pressure from the crowd.

“However, the judges should not make a decision just because of the pressure. They should refer to legal guidelines for justification,” Unggul said.

“The judges handed down the maximum sentence in the Temanggung case because the maximum sentence for a religious blasphemy case is five years. I don’t know why they levied the maximum sentence. It seldom takes place,” said Unggul.

Disappointed cries were heard both inside and outside the courtroom after prosecutors read their sentence demand. The crowd, dismayed by the court’s ruling, later went on a rampage. Antonius was arrested in Temanggung in October for distributing leaflets disparaging Islam.