Bulwark of justice?<\/p>\n
The Supreme Court's ruling yesterday to acquit Akbar Tandjung
\nof all charges of corruption, thereby overturning two earlier
\nlower court verdicts sentencing the House of Representatives
\nspeaker to three years in prison, is certain to have serious
\nconsequences for this country for a long time to come.<\/p>\n
In formulating its decision, the Supreme Court said that in
\nthe 1999 corruption case, the defendant could not be held
\nresponsible for the action of others involved in the embezzlement
\nof Rp 40 billion in public money, as he was only carrying out the
\ninstructions of his superior at the time, president B.J. Habibie.<\/p>\n
Considering a statement made last month by Supreme Court Chief
\nJustice Bagir Manan to the effect that it was the court's duty
\n"only to examine whether the lower courts had applied the law
\ncorrectly," yesterday's outcome should not have come entirely as
\na surprise. From the start, the trial of Akbar in this high-
\nprofile corruption case involving the misuse of public funds to
\nthe tune of Rp 40 billion, has been one of the quirkiest in
\nIndonesia's judicial history, involving top-ranking public
\nofficials.<\/p>\n
To briefly summarize the case: It all began when president
\nB.J. Habibie, in a meeting on Feb. 10, 1999, ordered Bulog (the
\nState Logistics Agency) to disburse Rp 40 billion from its
\nnonbudgetary funds, supposedly to relieve the suffering of the
\npoor under a "social safety net" program. Reportedly attending
\nthe meeting were Akbar Tandjung in his then capacity as minister\/
\nstate secretary, Bulog head Rahardi Ramlan and coordinating
\nminister for people's welfare Haryono Suyono. It was agreed to
\nentrust Akbar to oversee the disbursement of the money and to
\nhand it over to three ministers in president Habibie's cabinet,
\nnamely coordinating minister for people's welfare Haryono Suyono,
\ncooperatives minister Adi Sasono and minister of social welfare
\nJoestika Baharsjah.<\/p>\n
The first installment, totaling Rp 20 billion, divided equally
\nbetween two checks and signed by Bulog deputy financial chief
\nAhmad Ruskandar, was issued on March 2, 1999, and was reportedly
\ngiven by Ruskandar to Akbar, who in turn handed the checks to
\nFadel Muhammad and M.S. Hidayat, Golkar Party treasurer and
\ndeputy treasurer respectively. On April 20, at Akbar's request,
\nRuskandar issued eight more checks for a total of Rp 20 billion,
\nwhich the latter reportedly handed to Golkar functionaries Fadel
\nMuhammad, M.S. Hidayat, Enggartiasto Lukito, Setya Novanto and
\nGolkar chairman Mahadi Sinambela. How Golkar functionaries came
\nto be involved in the scheme was never satisfactorily explained.<\/p>\n
The case might never have come to light but for the dramatic
\nouster of president Soeharto, and the regime change that occurred
\non Oct. 20, 1999, when Habibie, the new president in transition
\nreplacing Soeharto, was outvoted in presidential elections in the
\nPeople's Consultative Assembly and Abdurrahman Wahid was elected
\nthe nation's new president. To cut a long story short, in
\nsubsequent court hearings Akbar at first denied ever having
\ntouched the checks, but later acknowledged having accepted them
\nand having handed the checks to Raudatul Jannah, a private
\nfoundation led by Dadang Ruskandar. In court, Akbar claimed the
\nfoundation had been recommended by Haryono Suyono -- a claim
\nwhich the latter denied.<\/p>\n
Although Rp 32.5 billion of the money was eventually returned
\nto the state by Winfried Simatupang, a businessman implicated in
\nthe case together with Akbar and Raudatul Jannah chairman
\nRuskandar, the Central Jakarta District Court, in its verdict on
\nSept. 4, 2002, found the House of Representatives speaker guilty
\nof corruption as charged and sentenced him to three years'
\nimprisonment, to be served pending a final decision from the
\nhighest court of appeal.<\/p>\n
At this point, a number of matters are worth noting. First,
\ntechnical considerations aside, plain common sense would dictate
\nthat Akbar, being the person entrusted with the disbursement of
\nthe money, should bear the responsibility for its proper
\nallocation -- that is, for the purpose of poverty alleviation, in
\naccordance with the presidential instruction. In other words,
\nyesterday's Supreme Court decision runs against the public's
\nsense of justice, all the more so because the Supreme Court
\nupheld the previous lower court rulings on two of Akbar's
\ncodefendants in the case, Winfried Simatupang and Dadang
\nSukandar, albeit with reduced terms. Considering that the Supreme
\nCourt ruling runs against two earlier court decisions,
\nyesterday's verdict brings into question the quality of the
\nentire judicial system in the eyes of the public and could
\nseriously impair public trust in the judiciary as a whole -- not
\nto mention the wider political implications. Many Indonesians
\nalso see it as a serious setback in the fight against corruption,
\nespecially that within the country's notoriously corrupt
\njudiciary.<\/p>\n
In any case, and for whatever it is worth, the country's
\nhighest legal authority has spoken: The case is closed. The
\nlogical consequence for Indonesians to ponder now is to prepare
\nthemselves for the social, political and possible economic
\nrepercussions that observers feel the ruling is certain to bring.<\/p>",
"url": "https:\/\/jawawa.id\/newsitem\/bulwark-of-justice-1447893297",
"image": ""
},
"sponsor": "Okusi Associates",
"sponsor_url": "https:\/\/okusiassociates.com"
}