Pertamina wins 17-year-old battle against Kartika<\/p>\n
JAKARTA (JP): The Singapore Appeals Court has finally closed
\nthe books on a 17-year legal wrangle over an $81 million estate
\nleft by a former Indonesian official, pronouncing the oil giant
\nPertamina as its rightful owner.<\/p>\n
Albert Hasibuan, who coordinated Pertamina's legal defense,
\nannounced yesterday that the Singapore court has upheld a 1992
\nverdict of the High Court which ruled in Pertamina's favor.<\/p>\n
Pertamina has been fighting for the ownership of the deposits
\nat the Singapore branch of Japan's Sumitomo bank, which with
\ninterest have soared to $81 million. The money was left by Achmad
\nThahir, a senior Pertamina official who died in 1976.<\/p>\n
Its chief opponent was his widow Kartika Thahir, who now
\nresides in Switzerland, and at one stage also children from his
\nfirst wife, but they later withdrew under government pressure.<\/p>\n
Pertamina contested the ownership of the fund by stating that
\nit originated from payoffs from German contractors which Thahir
\nreceived in return for fixing lucrative steel construction
\nprojects in Cilegon, West Java.<\/p>\n
Kartika, who employed top lawyers from Britain, said receiving
\ncommissions is normal business practice in Indonesia and
\ntherefore could not be construed as corruption, which is the
\nbasis of Pertamina's claim.<\/p>\n
Albert told reporters at his office yesterday that he
\npersonally went to Singapore on Thursday to pick up the verdict
\nfrom the Appeals Court.<\/p>\n
Appeals Court Judge Jong Pung How in the verdict said the fund
\nwas categorized as coming from bribe money and should be returned
\nto the Indonesian government, according to Albert.<\/p>\n
$5m to Kartika<\/p>\n
Pertamina however did not have all its way.<\/p>\n
\"The Appeals Court rejected our request for the title to
\nanother $5 million also deposited in Sumitomo bank,\" he said.
\n\"The court ruled that the money belongs to Kartika.\"<\/p>\n
Pertamina did not have enough evidence to claim the $5
\nmillion, according to Chief Judge Jong Pung How.<\/p>\n
The money, which had been frozen for nearly a decade in the
\nbank, was transferred to Pertamina's account immediately after
\nthe December 1992 High Court ruling.<\/p>\n
With the Appeals Court verdict, the Pertamina versus Kartika
\nThahir case is now closed because that is the last legal channel
\nfor any appeal, according to Albert.<\/p>\n
Harry Tjan Silalahi, advisor to Pertamina's legal team, told
\nThe Jakarta Post on a separate occasion that Kartika could not
\nappeal to the Privy Council in London because such recourse is
\nonly possible with the consent of both parties to the dispute, in
\nthis case Pertamina and Kartika.<\/p>\n
The Privy Council is the supreme court of the Commonwealth
\ncountries, of which Singapore is a member.<\/p>\n
The Indonesian government views the 1992 High Court ruling as
\na victory in its battle against corruption.<\/p>\n
Kartika at one stage during the high court battle threatened
\nto reveal what she claimed to be the corruption practices in
\nPertamina. But the court rejected the proposal at the Indonesian
\ngovernment's request.<\/p>\n
Pertamina's case was boosted by the written testimony in 1992
\nof L.B. Moerdani, then minister of defense, who had initially
\nbeen involved in the early negotiations with Kartika to secure
\nthe return of the fund to her.<\/p>\n
Moerdani said Kartika admitted the deposit fund came from
\ncommissions for fixing the contracts at Krakatau Steel, a project
\nmanaged and funded by Pertamina. (02\/hdj)<\/p>",
"url": "https:\/\/jawawa.id\/newsitem\/pertamina-wins-17-year-old-battle-against-kartika-1447893297",
"image": ""
},
"sponsor": "Okusi Associates",
"sponsor_url": "https:\/\/okusiassociates.com"
}