Tommy's vanishing act<\/p>\n
From the beginning, as far as the public is concerned, it had
\nnever been very likely that Hutomo \"Tommy\" Mandala Putra, former
\npresident Soeharto's youngest son, would ever spend time in
\nprison, never mind his legal transgressions.<\/p>\n
Police declared Tommy a fugitive as of midnight Saturday,
\nafter police had been banging on and waiting at his front gate on
\nFriday for more than six hours. In vain. Tommy, the apple of
\nSoeharto's eye, appeared to have vanished.<\/p>\n
Impossible? Depends on how one looks at the incident.<\/p>\n
To those who have been casually following the proceedings of
\nTommy's trial in the innocent belief that the 38-year-old could
\nbe trusted, his disappearance may look incredible and unexpected
\nindeed.<\/p>\n
To others, who have been observing the twisted funny little
\ndetails of the trial from the beginning, and watching the whole
\nproceedings with a healthy degree of skepticism, Tommy's
\nvanishing act on Friday was only a logical consequence of the way
\nthe authorities have been handling the case -- something that
\ncould have been expected all along.<\/p>\n
Tommy went on trial -- first as a suspect, then as a defendant
\n-- in the South Jakarta District Court early last year in a land
\nscam involving PT Goro Batara Sakti (GBS) and the government
\nlogistics agency Bulog. On trial with him was Ricardo Gelael. The
\nshady deal involved the swapping of a tract of swampy land for
\nprime piece of real estate belonging to Bulog that caused the
\nstate to suffer losses amounting to Rp 76.7 billion, or the
\nequivalent of US$8.2 million. Also involved in the same case was
\nBeddu Amang, a former head of Bulog.<\/p>\n
Beddu was acquitted in April last year on some technicalities.
\nTommy and Ricardo were absolved of any wrongdoing in October that
\nsame year for lack of evidence. But the state attorneys appealed
\nthe decision in the Supreme Court, which overturned in September
\nthe South Jakarta District Court's verdict and ordered both Tommy
\nand Ricardo spend 18 months in jail.<\/p>\n
From here on the case began to take some rather odd twists and
\nturns. Both men remained free since the Supreme Court's ruling,
\nbut while Ricardo admitted his misdeed, Tommy continued to deny
\nhaving done any wrongdoing but, nevertheless, asked for a
\npresidential pardon.<\/p>\n
Tommy formally appealed for a pardon on Oct. 3, which forced a
\nstay of the execution of the sentence. He also appealed for a
\njudicial review of the case. While a formal decision on the
\npardon was pending, Tommy sought to arrange a meeting with
\nPresident Abdurrahman Wahid, who agreed to meet him privately at
\nthe Borobudur Hotel on Oct. 7 and Oct. 8, giving rise to public
\nspeculations of a secret deal.<\/p>\n
To assuage the public's suspicions, the President made it
\nknown that he would turn down any request on Tommy's part for a
\npardon. True to his word, he did so a few days later, but Tommy
\nand his lawyers somehow managed to evade receiving the
\npresidential decree rejecting the plea.<\/p>\n
With time running out and the public complaining that the case
\nhad been dragging on long enough, prosecutors called on Tommy to
\nsurrender himself to the authorities and gave him until Friday 2
\np.m. to comply. What follows is public knowledge.<\/p>\n
When a team from the public prosecutor's office, accompanied
\nby a platoon of the police's Mobile Brigade arrived at Tommy's
\naddress on Jl. Rasamala, Menteng, Central Jakarta, at the
\ndesignated time, they found the house deserted.<\/p>\n
The whole incident raises a number of questions. Why, for
\nexample, did the prosecutors need to call on a person, already
\nconvicted of a crime, to surrender himself to the authorities?
\nWhy did they not keep the convicted businessman and his house
\nunder surveillance when they knew, or should have known, he was
\nonly stalling the execution of a court verdict?<\/p>\n
For President Abdurrahman Wahid, in his position as head of
\nthe government as well as personally, this could an important
\ntest case of the government's credibility. It could determine
\nwhether the public can be convinced of the government's sincerity
\nin its promise to firmly establish the rule of law in this
\ncountry.<\/p>\n
With things as they are at present, Abdurrahman's observation
\nthat his rejection of Tommy's appeal for a pardon is proof that
\nthe law rules supreme, and that the principle of equality before
\nthe law has been established, sounds rather hollow.<\/p>",
"url": "https:\/\/jawawa.id\/newsitem\/tommys-vanishing-act-1447893297",
"image": ""
},
"sponsor": "Okusi Associates",
"sponsor_url": "https:\/\/okusiassociates.com"
}