Avoiding pitfalls in police investigations<\/p>\n
The public's perception of the police is in the spotlight
\nafter incidents occurred which suggest that some officers might
\nhave erred in their duties. Tjetje Tadjudin, a robbery witness,
\ndied in custody at the Bogor police precinct. A controversy
\nerupted over a suspect in the killing of journalist Fuad Muhammad
\nSyafrudin (Udin) in Yogyakarta. These are some cases in point.
\nKoesparmono Irsan, a former deputy of operations with the
\nIndonesian National Police, explores the issue.<\/p>\n
Question: What do you say about the finding of the National
\nCommission on Human Rights, that the arrest of a suspect in a
\njournalist's killing in Yogyakarta was a violation of human
\nrights?<\/p>\n
Answer: We have to pay attention to two things. First, the
\nprocedure. Second, the target. To reach the target, a procedure
\nis needed. A procedural mistake -- for example, arresting a
\nsuspect without an arrest warrant -- is usually easier to
\ncorrect. But once you have the wrong target, you have to give
\nmore serious attention to the mistake.<\/p>\n
I think what the rights body found out recently is an honest
\ninput for the National Police. They have to take it seriously so
\nthat, in the future, they will be able to avoid similar mistakes
\nand difficulties.<\/p>\n
Actually, I can also say that Udin's and Tjetje's case are
\namong so many similar cases the police have handled in the past.
\nI'm very sure about that. So the procedure of arresting and
\nquestioning a suspect must have become a familiar part of their
\njob. Therefore, it is inexcusable that such a mistake still
\noccurs.<\/p>\n
In this case, I think, it would be better for the local police
\nchiefs (in Bogor and Yogyakarta) to give honest explanations to
\nthe public about what has actually happened. The National Police,
\nhowever, serve the public, not certain individuals. They are
\nsupposed to protect the community, not certain people only.<\/p>\n
Q: What is the first thing a police officer should do before
\nhe conducts an investigation?<\/p>\n
A: They should have a thorough understanding of the case. Is
\nit true that the suspect they have arrested is the real killer?
\nIf it is, prove it through empirical evidence, honest evidence.
\nNot evidence provided by certain persons with particular
\ninterests. If they have the wrong suspect, on the other hand,
\nthey have to be brave enough to admit it. There's no need to be
\nashamed.<\/p>\n
In fact, in this case, they have repeatedly claimed they are
\non the right track. If this is true, we have to give them the
\nchance to prove what they have in court. Let the court decide who
\nis wrong, who is right.<\/p>\n
Once a case is brought to court, the attorneys should also do
\ntheir jobs properly. They have to refer to the facts, not public
\nopinion. If they have doubts regarding the results of the
\npolice's investigation, they have the right to conduct their own
\ninvestigations before filing it with the court. They also have
\nthe right to monitor the police's investigation. But once they
\nissue a PK-21 letter -- a letter clarifying that a police
\ninvestigation is correct and has been completed -- the police's
\ntask is over. It's now up to the attorneys to bring the case to
\ncourt.<\/p>\n
Q: What about Tjetje's case, in which a suspect died in
\ncustody at a police precinct?<\/p>\n
A: That's human error. Such a thing does not only occur in
\nIndonesia. It happens everywhere, although they are all under
\noath to do their jobs properly. But that doesn't mean we should
\ntolerate such things. We have to make efforts to avoid fatal
\nerrors like that.<\/p>\n
Q: It's been said that pressure from senior police officers
\noften led to such things taking place...<\/p>\n
A: Again, it's human error. Why should the senior officers
\nexert pressure? However, I think it's understandable. They have
\nto complete their questioning in a limited time. If they fail to
\ncomplete the questioning within 20 days, they have to ask the
\ndistrict attorney for more time. This is not easy, because the
\nattorney will drop the case if he or she feels uncertain about
\nit. This means the police lose the chance to prove their thesis
\nabout the case.<\/p>\n
Sometimes, they also become discouraged when the suspect
\nrefuses to confess while in the meantime, they have already
\nobtained evidence that supports their allegation. In this case,
\nwe cannot make a generalization. Each case is different from
\nothers. Similarly, one officer is different from another.<\/p>\n
Q: Is a suspect's testimony such an important thing that the
\npolice will do anything to get it?<\/p>\n
A: A police investigation is usually based on the preliminary
\nclues which are supported by evidence. There are five types of
\nevidence: testimony from witnesses, from experts, documents,
\nfiles listing the allegations, and testimony from the suspect(s).<\/p>\n
Here, the suspect's testimony is submitted last. That means
\nthat a suspect's testimony is meaningless without other
\nsupporting evidence. And each piece of material evidence itself
\nmust have its own convincing proof. Every police officer must
\nacknowledge this, as this is clearly mentioned in paragraph 184
\nof the Criminal Code Procedures.<\/p>\n
Q: What is your suggestion to avoid such abuse during a police
\ninterrogation?<\/p>\n
A: Once the police find out that all the evidence supports the
\nallegation, they should present the case right away in front of
\nthe attorneys, the lawyers, and the experts. Anyone connected
\nwith the case is allowed to hear it in an informal hearing. If
\nthe suspect still rejects the allegation, thus ignoring the
\nsupporting evidence, the police can ask for input from other
\nparties, including the suspect's lawyer.<\/p>\n
This (case hearing), can be conducted routinely; once a week,
\nevery two days, or whenever it is needed.<\/p>\n
I also suggest that every police interrogation must be
\nwitnessed by the suspect's lawyer. By so doing, the interrogation
\nofficers are prevented from beating the suspect.<\/p>\n
Maj. Gen. (ret) Koesparmono Irsan is now a lecturer at the
\nPolice Science College and rector of Bhayangkara Jaya University.<\/p>",
"url": "https:\/\/jawawa.id\/newsitem\/avoiding-pitfalls-in-police-investigations-1447893297",
"image": ""
},
"sponsor": "Okusi Associates",
"sponsor_url": "https:\/\/okusiassociates.com"
}