Death penalties hottest trial news from Jakarta's courtrooms
Death penalties hottest trial news from Jakarta's courtrooms
By Ahmad Junaidi
JAKARTA (JP): Trials in the city were marked this year by
court decisions giving the death sentence to two defendants for
committing murders.
The first death sentence was given on May 13 by the Central
Jakarta District Court to Harnoko Dewantono, alias Oki, 32. The
second was given on May 21 by the same court to Siswanto, alias
Robot Gedek, 33.
Oki's trial started on June 27, 1996, after it was debated
whether he could be tried here because the murders took place in
Los Angeles between 1991 and 1992.
Oki denied killing Suresh, but presiding judge IGK Sukarata
still sentenced Oki to death, the maximum penalty possible
because the defendant was charged, under Article 340 of the
Criminal Code, with premeditated murder.
Prosecutor J. Kamaru had asked the court to sentence the
defendant to death but Oki and his lawyers, including Henry
Yosodiningrat, asked the court to sentence Oki to only serve a
life sentence.
On Sept. 9, the Jakarta High Court upheld the district court's
verdict and Oki now is awaiting an appeal to the Supreme Court.
Robot was given the death sentence for killing 12 boys.
The verdict, which was decided by presiding judge Sartono, was
supported by law experts because of Robot's sadistic acts.
Robot and his lawyer Najab Khan are now awaiting an appeal to
the Jakarta High Court.
Central Jakarta District Court gave seven students heavy
sentences; sentences which were also aimed at discouraging the
public, especially junior and senior high school students, from
brawling.
The seven students were sentenced on Sept. 8 to an average
four months to six months jail each. Six other students are still
being tried in the same court, also on charges of killing another
student in a separate brawl.
Another case which attracted major public attention was the
trial of television actress Zarima Mirafsur, alias Zarina, who
was charged with possession of 29,677 Ecstasy pills.
On June 5, the West Jakarta District Court stated the 25-year-
old actress was guilty of violating the 1992 Health Law by
keeping the pills in her house.
Presiding judge Sumantri sentenced Zarina, who before her
trial escaped from police custody, to four years in jail. Zarina
fainted when she heard the verdict.
The maximum penalty for this offense is 15 years.
Zarina and her lawyers, including Amir Syamsuddin, are now
waiting for a decision from the Supreme Court.
Following Zarina's trial, many similar cases were tried under
a new law, Law No. 5/1997 on psychotropic drugs, which was
endorsed by the House of Representatives in January.
The law carries heavier penalties for smugglers, dealers and
users of these drugs.
Other Ecstasy cases involving dozens of discotheque patrons
also went to court this year. The defendants, mainly young men
and women, were tried for consuming the pills and most were
sentenced to an average three months in jail.
The prosecution presented evidence obtained from forensic
expert Abdul Mun'im Idries, which showed there were traces of
Ecstasy in the defendants' urine.
The involvement of Mun'im in police raids against drug users
in discotheques was criticized by the Indonesian Doctors
Association, which said that his involvement was unethical and
violated the doctor's pledge.
In once case, a judge in the West Jakarta District Court also
questioned Mun'im about his involvement, but Mun'im defended
himself by saying that he could not refuse since he was invited
by the police. He also said that a forensic doctor's duty was
different from the one of a medical doctor.
After the brief misunderstanding, the forensic doctor
continued giving statements against defendants in similar cases
in the Central and West Jakarta District Courts.
The Ecstasy cases were apparently intended to administer a
kind of shock therapy to the public, especially to drug users.
Other drug cases, including heroin smuggling involving many
Nigerians, also attracted public attention.
At least four Nigerians were sentenced to between six years
and 17 years in jail at the Central Jakarta District Court this
year for attempted heroin smuggling.
Most of the Nigerians said they entered the country to buy
garments at Tanah Abang market in Central Jakarta.
Some said that many foreigners have tried to smuggle heroin or
Ecstasy pills into the country because the punishment for drug
trafficking was "too light".
Some drug traffickers, especially Ecstasy dealers, were
reportedly sentenced to only a few months because they could pay
certain people to help with their trials.
A Singaporean defendant, for example, who had been earlier
indicted with trafficking about 2,000 pills, was sentenced to
only eight months in jail.
The Central Jakarta District Court stated that the defendant
was guilty of possessing 19 pills. The man was then released
because he had already been detained for eight months.
But, on Dec. 10, a prosecutor asked the South Jakarta District
Court to sentence a young Nepalese man to death for trafficking
1.29 kilograms of heroin.
Will the 23-year-old student become the third defendant to get
the death penalty? If the trial is not adjourned, the court will
decide on a sentence before the end of this year.
Now, approaching the end of the year, the case of murdered
businessman Nyo Beng Seng is once again attracting public
attention. Police have arrested and questioned four prosecutors
for allegedly falsifying a witness' statements during the trial.
During the trial, the prosecutors were believed to have
engineered the statements of Kikie Ariyanto against defendant
Hasan, alias Eng San.
On June 12, Eng San was sentenced by the North Jakarta
District Court to 17 years in jail for his role in the 1994
murder of Nyo Beng Seng.
Some experts have said the prosecutors' arrests were
unethical, adding that the police should have asked their
superiors to handle the arrests and questioning.
Others have said that the arrests were legal since the
prosecutors, like many other citizens, were suspected of
committing a crime.
This case exposes disharmony among law enforcers, especially
between police as the investigators and the prosecutors.
Will this incident go to court? Who will become the prosecutor
against colleagues who have become defendants? It will probably
be one of the interesting trials for next year.