Akbar's liberty, Criminal Code disputed

Akbar's liberty, Criminal Code disputed

Muhammad Nafik, The Jakarta Post, Jakarta

Demand have been growing for the government and the House of
Representatives to revise the Criminal Code Procedures (KUHAP) to
ensure that a defendant convicted by a district court goes to
jail immediately regardless of whether or not he or she lodges an
appeal.

Legal experts also said the revisions should oblige a
convicted official to temporarily relinquish his or her public
position despite an appeal request.

"Our law should be changed so as to be able to send a
convicted person to prison immediately, regardless of whether the
convict appeals the verdict or not," Harkristuti Harkrisnowo, a
prominent legal expert from University of Indonesia, told The
Jakarta Post on Tuesday night.

"If all convicted criminals have to await the handling of
their appeals at higher courts, who will be sent to jail then?"
she added.

She said there should also be an "explicit provision" in the
Criminal Code Procedures, which would require temporary
suspensions of officials found guilty of crimes by district
courts.

"I even want an official to be suspended from his or her
position once he or she goes to trial for a criminal case. It
would be effective to prevent the defendant from possibly
misusing his/her power to influence the trial," Harkristuti
added.

Muladi, former supreme justice and justice minister, made a
similar call for the Criminal Code Procedures to be reviewed to
allow any convicted persons to serve jail terms promptly.

"I also agree with the idea of revisions in order to make
convicted officials non-active temporarily from their state
duties," he told the Post on Wednesday.

Noted lawyer Luhut M. Pangaribuan shared the same view, saying
that the current KUHAP contained loopholes, that allowed
convicted criminals to retain their public positions.

Such calls to revise the KUHAP surfaced following the decision
of the Central Jakarta District Court to sentence House of
Representatives speaker and Golkar Party chairman Akbar Tandjung
to three years in jail for taking Rp 40 billion (US$4.4 million)
of state funds, but the court is allowing Akbar to remain free
pending his appeal.

Akbar maintains that his positions as House speaker and Golkar
Party chairman, despite outrage and humiliation from legislators
and the public, who believe he is further tarnishing Indonesia's
image.

Akbar and his supporters at Golkar claimed that despite the
conviction he remained legally innocent until he received an
irrevocable verdict issued by higher courts. Therefore, they
argued, Akbar should retain his top post in the House.

But Harkristuti rejected the arguments by Akbar and his
lawyers as "illogical", saying the presumption of innocence
principles were only relevant before a conviction.

"The presumption of innocence principles are no longer
applicable after a verdict is issued," she said.

The Akbar case has sparked a polemic among the public as
pressure was mounting for him to step aside in order to comply
with political ethics.

But Akbar is not the first person to get such a special
treatment from the court.

Earlier, Bank Indonesia Sjahril Sabirin also enjoyed the same
treatment. He was convicted of graft and given three years in
prison by the Central Jakarta District Court in the Bank Bali
case, but he also maintained his position as the central bank
governor. He was later acquitted by the Jakarta High Court.

The decision to let a convicted criminal to remain free lies
totally with the judges. There is no clear cut rule in the
Criminal Code Procedures on when the judges could let a convicted
criminal remain free.