Court criticized for leniency toward Bob Hasan

JAKARTA (JP): Legal observers said on Saturday that the Central Jakarta District Court had been too lenient in sentencing timber tycoon Muhammad "Bob" Hasan, charged with corruption, to only two years in jail.

A criminologist at the University of Indonesia, Harkristuti Harkrisnowo, told The Jakarta Post that Bob Hasan, an aide to former president Soeharto, had received too many facilities from the government in the past, despite his huge donations to the state through a sport's organization.

"The fact (that he had received many facilities) should have been taken into consideration by the panel of judges to give him a sterner sentence," she said. "Such an improper verdict could inspire other courts to give light sentences to defendants in similar cases."

Noted lawyer Todung Mulya Lubis, who is also a staunch human rights activist, expressed wonder upon Bob Hasan's "wonderful" sentence, saying that such a light verdict would not deter people from corruption.

"The court's verdict does not support the nation's efforts to eradicate corruption, and is against and hurts any sense of justice," he said by phone, citing the release of a Bank Bali embezzlement suspect as an example.

The Central Jakarta District Court sentenced on Friday Bob Hasan, once minister of industry and trade, to two years in jail for embezzling US$75 million in forestry funds belonging to the Ministry of Forestry.

The verdict was one-quarter of the term demanded by prosecutors.

The court also ruled that the defendant's company assets be seized and that the defendant be fined Rp 15 million, or spend another six months in jail.

Harkristuti said that courts (nowadays) tended to give corruptors lighter sentences. "It's quite different from court verdicts on similar cases in the past."

She said there was a shift in the implementation of Law on Corruption No. 3/1971, which rules on sentences for corruptors.

"There should have been guidelines (for judges) to avoid controversy in sentencing corruptors. Thus, the judges could take both aggravating and mitigating factors into account fairly when making their verdict," she said.

Harkristuti said that Bob Hasan could be jailed soon after the court declared him guilty. "An exception is possible if the defendant is waiting for an appeal. In such circumstances the execution of the verdict may be suspended."

Bob Hasan had received legal privileges when the court ruled on a house arrest. He has not been held at the Salemba detention center as earlier reported in the Post.

According to Todung, failure to stamp out corruption was the collective sin of Indonesian judges.

He also regretted that Law No. 3/1971 did not deter people from committing acts of corruption. "Other corruptors may think that the punishment is nothing compared to the huge sum of money they steal from the state."

Stressing his query, Todung said, "We don't know whether the courts will also let Bank Indonesia governor Sjahril Sabirin or former State Logistic Agency (Bulog) chief Beddu Amang walk free."

Criminal law expert Loebby Loqman admitted that the 1971 corruption law had numerous weaknesses. "That's why we now apply the 1999 Law, which stipulates a minimum conviction (to corruptors) to replace the 1971 Law," he told the Post from Surabaya by phone.

Commenting on Bob Hasan's verdict, Loebby said it was the right of the panel of judges to determine the sentence, adding that the sense of justice among judges might be different.

He declined to comment further. He did, however, suggest that the prosecutors appeal to the High Court. (01)