Eddy Tansil appeals to Supreme Court
JAKARTA (JP): Businessman Eddy Tansil, who was convicted for cheating a state bank of Rp 1.3 trillion ($620 million), has appealed to the Supreme Court after the Jakarta High Court raised his sentence from 17 to 20 years.
His lawyers filed the appeal through the Central Jakarta District Court on Thursday. They argue that the High Court judges neglected some legal points in their consideration.
Ironically, it was Tansil who appealed to the High Court immediately after the Central Jakarta District Court found him guilty and sentenced him to 17 years imprisonment. The Attorney General's office, which had earlier demanded life imprisonment, also appealed to the high court.
Tansil, owner of the Golden Key Group, was convicted for his role in a huge loan scandal at Bank Pembangunan Indonesia (Bapindo). He was ordered to pay Rp 500 billion in restitution and another Rp 30 million in fines to the government.
The Jakarta High Court upheld the guilty verdict, confirmed the restitution and fines and then increased the jail sentence. It also verified the lower court's order for the government to appropriate much of Tansil's wealth, including his houses, land, factories, offices, cars and bank deposits.
Four former Bapindo directors and a junior executive have been sentenced for their role in the scam. Their jail terms range from four to nine years.
Gani Djemat, the top corporate lawyer who led Tansil's defense, told The Jakarta Post that the High Court neglected some points that could have actually mitigated his client's crime.
He referred, in particular, to Tansil's goodwill gesture of handing over the management of three of his companies to Bank Dagang Negara and Bank Bumi Daya. Both are owned by the state. His also offered the government control over the ownership of the three companies.
The three companies and the assets already confiscated equal Bapindo's reported losses, Tansil's lawyer added.
The latest ruling against Tansil comes at a time when the entire judicial system is burdened with appeal cases.
Many observers welcomed the ruling as a deterrent to others indiscriminately appealing to a higher court if they lose. There have been other cases this year in which the penalty or jail terms were raised upon appeal.
The Commission III of the House of Representatives, which deals with legal issues, said on Thursday that it plans to discuss the Supreme Court's proposal to tighten appeal procedures, at least for civil cases.
"Limiting appeals in civil cases will lessen the burden of the Supreme Court," Ahmad Roestandi, a legislator from the Armed Forces faction, told Antara.
In the absence of any restriction, the high court and supreme court often have to deal with civil cases involving trivial sums of money.
Albert Hasibuan, a noted lawyer and a member of the Commission from the Golkar faction, said there must be guidelines on which cases can go to the Supreme Court.
"Appealing to the Supreme Court should only be open for questionable cases," he said.
He said the government must also show restraint in cases where a lower court acquits a defendant.
Early this month the government was defeated in the highly publicized murder case of a labor activist when the High Court acquitted a man accused by the government of masterminding the murder.
Many parties, including the National Commission on Human Rights, urged the government to drop the case and to search for the real murderers of Marsinah. Government prosecutors, however, continue to insist that they have the murderers and are filing an appeal with the Supreme Court. (imn)