Court Serves as the Last Bastion for Justice Seekers to Obtain Legal Certainty
The legal team of Budi, the defendant in an alleged defamation case, has urged the Deputy Attorney General for Supervision and the Attorney General’s Office to investigate the Public Prosecutor handling their client’s case at the North Jakarta District Court. This follows the Public Prosecutor’s objection to the judge’s interim decision declaring the case time-barred, which the legal team argues undermines the integrity of the prosecution and legal certainty in Indonesia.
Faomasi Laia, Budi’s lawyer, believes that the Public Prosecutor’s insistence on pursuing a case that has expired under the New Criminal Code (Law No. 1 of 2023) can damage the reputation of the prosecution and undermine legal certainty in Indonesia.
“With all due respect, we request that the Deputy Attorney General for Supervision and the Attorney General investigate the Public Prosecutor whose actions are in direct conflict with the New Criminal Code. There is no reason for the Public Prosecutor to force this case to the evidentiary stage,” Faomasi said in a statement on Thursday (February 26, 2026).
Previously, the panel of judges at the North Jakarta District Court, in an interim decision on January 29, 2026, acquitted Budi and released him from custody. The judge granted the defense’s exception because the case was declared time-barred, referring to Articles 136 and 137 of the New Criminal Code, which came into effect on January 2, 2026.
Faomasi explained that based on the principle of Lex Favor Reo, if there is a change in legislation, the rule that applies is the one that is most beneficial to the defendant. In this case, the statute of limitations in the New Criminal Code is more lenient for his client.
“The judge’s decision must be considered correct and must be enforced. Ignoring the facts of the trial and the New Criminal Code is a black mark for our law enforcement,” he emphasized.
Furthermore, Faomasi warned of legal consequences for prosecutors who continue to pursue cases that are legally flawed or time-barred. He said that such actions could be categorized as criminal offenses.
“If a prosecutor forces a case to prosecution even though it is time-barred, it can be a criminal offense. The law is clear. Such actions are not only illegal but also jeopardize the professional integrity of a prosecutor,” said Faomasi.
Faomasi has also submitted a request for legal protection and supervision to President Prabowo Subianto, Vice President Gibran Rakabuming Raka, and Coordinating Minister for Legal Affairs and Human Rights Imipas Yusril Ihza Mahendra.
The letter was also sent to Commission III of the DPR RI, the Supreme Court, Minister of Justice and Human Rights Natalius Pigai, and Deputy Minister of Justice and Human Rights Prof. Edward Omar Sharif Hiariej (Eddy Hiariej).
“The court must be the last bastion for those seeking justice to obtain legal certainty. If the Public Prosecutor continues to be irresponsible, then the authority of our law is threatened,” he concluded. (H-2)
The legal team of Muhammad Kerry Adrianto Riza denied all the allegations made by the prosecutor in the alleged corruption case involving the management of oil and fuel terminals at PT OTM.
The legal team of Kerry Riza questioned the demand for an 18-year prison sentence and Rp13.4 trillion in compensation in the alleged corruption case involving the management of crude oil.
The statement was made by prosecutor Roy Riady during the examination of Strategic Partner Manager Google for Education, Ganis Samoedra Murharyono.
The Public Prosecutor demanded a 10-month prison sentence for 21 defendants in the case of the riots that occurred during the August 2025 demonstration.
An expert witness presented in the trial of the corruption case involving the import of sugar revealed fundamental weaknesses in the prosecutor’s indictment.