Court dismisses suit against Pertamina<\/p>\n
JAKARTA (JP): The Central Jakarta District Court dropped on
\nWednesday a civil lawsuit filed by five former employees of state
\noil and gas company Pertamina who were dismissed from the firm in
\n1968 because of their alleged involvement in the Indonesian
\nCommunist Party (PKI).<\/p>\n
Presiding judge Ali Akmal Haky said in the pretrial verdict
\nthat the district court did not have the authority to try the
\ncase.<\/p>\n
\"A person or an institution can file a civil lawsuit with the
\nJakarta State Administrative Court against a state institution's
\ndecision, which has considerably caused the plaintiff to suffer
\nlosses.<\/p>\n
\"And the authority to examine such cases lies with the State
\nAdministrative Court,\" said Ali, while referring to Article 53 of
\nthe 1986 State Administrative Court Law.<\/p>\n
Ali added it was the administrative court which would also
\nrule whether the plaintiff would be compensated or reinstated.<\/p>\n
The five former Pertamina employees are Ali Basir, Abdul
\nHaris, Parta bin Karyadi, Ahmad Saudi and Satriya. They named
\nformer president Soeharto, President Abdurrahman Wahid, Pertamina
\nand Pertamina's former president director Ibnu Sutowo as
\ndefendants in the lawsuit.<\/p>\n
The five were represented by lawyers Otep Ginanjar and
\nHendrikus Kuntag, while the defendants were represented by, among
\nothers, Syamsul Hadi and Victor R. Sulaiman.<\/p>\n
Judge Ali said the dispute centered around Pertamina's
\ndecision from Aug. 6, 1968, to dismiss the five employees, who
\nwere identified as members of the now defunct left-wing Oil
\nWorkers Union (Perbum).<\/p>\n
Perbum was supervised by PKI, which was blamed for an abortive
\ncoup on Sept. 30, 1965.<\/p>\n
Right after the verdict, lawyer Hendrikus announced that they
\nwere considering filing an appeal.<\/p>\n
\"We are considering an appeal. The judge has neglected the
\nprinciples of impartiality as he only quoted testimonies from the
\ndefendants, but ignored the plaintiff's statements in the
\nverdict,\" he said.<\/p>\n
In response to the lawyer's statement, Ali said: \"The
\nplaintiff can file an appeal with the Jakarta High Court. But our
\nverdict is final!\"<\/p>\n
The lawyer then approached Ali to shake Ali's hands, but Ali
\nrefused.<\/p>\n
In the lawsuit, the former employees demanded the defendants
\npay some Rp 5.75 billion (US$714,300) in compensation for their
\ndismissal.<\/p>\n
The former employees filed a lawsuit against the company at
\nthe same district court in 1981, but the court ruled that it did
\nnot have the authority to try the case and suggested they present
\ntheir case to the Ministry of Manpower.<\/p>\n
Soeharto, one of the defendants in the case, was mandated in
\nMarch 1966 by then president Sukarno to restore order in the
\ncountry after the PKI's abortive coup. One of his steps was
\ndissolving all organizations associated with PKI, including
\nPerbum.<\/p>\n
But the steps reached beyond the mandate years after. It was
\nnot a secret that even friends or relatives of convicted PKI
\nmembers were prevented from entering the Indonesia Military or
\nthe bureaucracy of Indonesia. Those found guilty during the coup
\nwere often prosecuted and put to death without legal grounds.
\n(asa)<\/p>",
"url": "https:\/\/jawawa.id\/newsitem\/court-dismisses-suit-against-pertamina-1447893297",
"image": ""
},
"sponsor": "Okusi Associates",
"sponsor_url": "https:\/\/okusiassociates.com"
}