Attorney General cannot seek review of Tommy case

Attorney General cannot seek review of Tommy case

Tiarma Siboro Bambang Nurbianto, The Jakarta Post, Jakarta

Legal experts said on Thursday the Attorney General's Office
cannot file a judicial review against the Supreme Court's verdict
that cleared former president Soeharto's youngest son Hutomo
"Tommy" Mandala Putra of corruption charges, saying such a move
can only be taken by a convict.

"There is no legal basis for the Attorney General's Office to
file a review against an edict issued in response to a review
request submitted by a convict," legal expert Abdul Hakim Garuda
Nusantara told The Jakarta Post on Thursday.

"If the Attorney General's Office goes ahead in filing a case
review, it will be seen as carrying political underpinnings," he
said.

Article 263, paragraph 1 of the country's Criminal Code
stipulates that only a convict or his/her heirs can file a
judicial review.

The Supreme Court on Monday overturned its earlier verdict
that convicted fugitive Tommy of corruption for his involvement
in a Rp 95.4 billion (US$11.2 million) land-swap case between his
supermarket chain PT Goro Batara Sakti and the State Logistics
Agency (Bulog).

The ruling took lawmakers and legal experts by surprise, and
may tarnish President Megawati Soekarnoputri's efforts to recover
trust in the country's legal system. Some lawmakers have urged
the government to investigate the judges in the case.

Abdul Hakim said controversy over cases involving Soeharto and
his family members would continue as long as the government and
legal authorities are not committed to resolving them.

"In Tommy's case, for example, why would state prosecutors
investigate the Goro case which did not have clear evidence of
Tommy's involvement. There are so many other cases which could be
used to bring Tommy to court," Abdul Hakim said.

"I do not blame the justices for clearing Tommy of corruption
charges because that particular case was very weak," he said.

Separately, Achmad Ali a professor of law at Hasanuddin
University in Sulawesi roundly criticized the legal process in
this case.

"The Tommy case clearly reveals some odd things, including the
Supreme Court decision to reopen the case, which contradicts
Article 1 of Law No. 3/1950," Achmad told the Post by telephone.

He stressed that a formal request for a presidential pardon is
the absolute final legal effort available for a suspect to take.

"It should be understood that no legal step can be taken after
a request for a presidential pardon is rejected," he said,
referring to former president Abdurrahman Wahid's rejection of
such a plea last year.

"A pardon request is filed by someone who admits guilt, while
a review is filed by someone who denies responsibility (for a
crime) and continues to claim innocence," he said.

Achmad, however, admitted that another review filed by the
Attorney General's Office also has no legal basis, but "it is at
least consistent to challenge some weird things with more weird
things."

Achmad further said that justice M. Taufiq was inconsistent
when he contended that Tommy, as a commissioner of Goro Batara
Sakti, could not be held responsible for any policies decided by
the company's board of directors.

However, in the case of timber tycoon Mohamad "Bob" Hasan, the
Supreme Court decided that, as commissioner of PT Mapindo Parama,
he was responsible for corruption, and thus guilty and sentenced
to six years in prison.

Achmad, who served as an expert advisor to the late, former
attorney general Baharrudin Lopa, also underlined that
negotiations held between Goro and Bulog were conducted in 1995,
a year before Tommy resigned as commissioner from the company.

"If the Supreme Court opens hearings for another review in the
Tommy case to be filed by prosecutors, I guess the court will
likely take people's disappointment seriously," Achmad said.