TEMPO.CO, Jakarta - SETARA Institute has criticized the Jakarta High\nMilitary Court II-06 ruling, which reduced the sentences of two of the\nfour defendants in the acid attack case against Andrie Yunus. In its\nverdict, the panel of judges revoked the military discharge penalty and\nreduced the prison terms for the first defendant, Second Sergeant\n(Serda) Edi Sudarko, and the second defendant, First Lieutenant (Lettu)\nBudhi Hariyanto Widhi Cahyono.<\/p>\n
Hendardi, Chairperson of the SETARA Institute National Council,\nstated that the ruling demonstrates the state\u2019s lacking commitment to\ndelivering justice for the victim. \u201cThe decision shows how the legal\nprocess is designed as an instrument to perpetuate impunity,\u201d Hendardi\nsaid in a written statement on Sunday, September 6, 2026.<\/p>\n
Under the appeal decision, Edi Sudarko\u2019s sentence was reduced from\nthree years to two years and six months in prison. Meanwhile, Budhi\nHariyanto Widhi Cahyono\u2019s sentence was reduced from two years and six\nmonths to two years. In addition to reducing their prison terms, the\nappellate judges overturned the dismissal of both officers from military\nservice.<\/p>\n
Meanwhile, sentences for the third defendant, Captain Nandala Dwi\nPrasetyo, and the fourth defendant, First Lieutenant Sami Lakka,\nremained unchanged. Captain Nandala received a two-year prison sentence,\nwhile Lettu Sami was sentenced to one year and six months.<\/p>\n
Hendardi noted that the appellate ruling, which reduced the penalties\nand canceled the dismissals of both perpetrators, was predictable from\nthe outset. According to him, the reduced sanctions confirm that the\nlegal process fails to penalize offenders, let alone deliver justice to\nvictims.<\/p>\n
\u201cOn the contrary, the mechanism is considered as a means to spread\nfear among civilians and anyone brave enough to monitor, criticize, and\ndemand accountability for the behavior of authorities,\u201d he said.<\/p>\n
Furthermore, he highlighted that the primary flaw in handling the\ncase stems from a crisis of credibility across the judicial mechanism.\nAccording to Hendardi, trying the case in a military court was\nfundamentally flawed from the beginning. He views this choice of venue\nas an institutional arrangement that shields perpetrators while exposing\nvictims to revictimization.<\/p>\n
Law enforcement proceedings were initially managed by the police\nwithin the civilian judicial system. However, the case was subsequently\ntaken over following intervention by the TNI Military Police Center\n(Puspom TNI) and ultimately transferred to a military justice.<\/p>\n
He stressed that this jurisdictional shift compromises judicial\nindependence and legal accountability. For the SETARA Institute, when\nmilitary personnel accused of crimes against civilians are investigated,\nprosecuted, and tried by their own internal system, a conflict of\ninterest becomes inevitable.<\/p>\n
Structurally, he added, the military justice system is inherently\nincapable of offering independence or accountability when judging its\nown members. When officers are tried internally, the legal proceedings\nrisk compromise, a narrowing of scope, and institutional\nself-preservation that smothers the truth.<\/p>\n
\u201cBringing this case to military court signals that the state is more\ninterested in institutional damage control than in ensuring justice for\nthe victim,\u201d he said.<\/p>\n
Additionally, the SETARA Institute criticized authorities for\ncompelling the KontraS activist to testify while he was still undergoing\ncritical medical treatment. Hendardi condemned this treatment as\ndisrespectful, emphasizing that it further revictimized the target of\nthe attack.<\/p>\n
Therefore, Hendardi stated that the public cannot trust the legal\nproceedings or the verdicts produced by military courts in this case.\nThis lack of trust is a logical consequence of the state\u2019s failure to\nprovide an independent and transparent judicial process.<\/p>\n
According to him, the court\u2019s decision in the Andrie Yunus case\nlegitimizes the continuation of impunity in Indonesia. He believes the\nlegal process has lost credibility regarding the rule of law and\ncivilian supremacy.<\/p>\n
\u201cWhat is collapsing is not only justice in a single case, but also\npublic trust in the state and the law itself,\u201d Hendardi said.<\/p>\n
Read: What Did TNI HQ Say About Appeal Ruling in Andrie Yunus\nCase?<\/p>\n
Click here to get the latest news updates from Tempo on Google\nNews<\/p>", "url": "https:\/\/jawawa.id\/newsitem\/acid-attack-ruling-fosters-impunity-setara-says-1788709815", "image": "" }, "sponsor": "Okusi Associates", "sponsor_url": "https:\/\/okusiassociates.com" }