Customs Bribery Allegations Must Be Investigated Objectively and Comprehensively

The handling of alleged customs bribery in importation cases within the Directorate General of Customs and Excise (DJBC) must prioritise objectivity and robust legal evidence. Law enforcement agencies are cautioned against forming unverified opinions before trial. Trisakti University Criminal Law lecturer Azmi Syahputra said the legal enforcement process must focus on uncovering all facts to prevent public bias. “Don’t stop at the ‘scapegoat’. If the allegations are true and proven, investigators must not be satisfied with just imprisoning mid-level officials or field witnesses who delivered coded envelopes,” he told reporters. He added that in high-profile cases, balancing investigative narratives with facts presented in court is crucial to ensure the public receives complete information and avoids misconceptions about ongoing legal proceedings. Mr Syahputra noted that discrepancies between public narratives and court evidence could cause confusion and erode public trust in the legal system. The comments come amid emerging court facts, including new testimonies, such as Blue Ray Cargo’s legal representative questioning whether specific coded envelopes were indeed received by the named recipients. Therefore, Mr Syahputra warned investigators not to rely solely on symbols, codes, or internal terms without sufficient evidence. “In criminal law, accomplice liability provisions can expand and establish criminal responsibility, serving as the best tool to unravel organised corruption networks,” he said. He explained that criminal law instruments allow investigators to trace those suspected of knowing, controlling, or benefiting from criminal acts, even without direct physical involvement. “So investigators need not hesitate or claim difficulty proving the physical act of delivering envelopes,” he added.