Hopes for end to corruption fade away

Moch. N. Kurniawan, The Jakarta Post, Jakarta

People are certainly losing confidence in the judiciary system and in the ongoing battle against corruption in the country following the Supreme Court's decision to accept House Speaker Akbar Tandjung's appeal against a three-year sentence over a graft conviction.

Noted corporate lawyer Todung Mulya Lubis who expressed strong disappointment over the Supreme Court's verdict said: "Today is a sad day for this country..."

He said nobody could make any changes although a public examination of the verdict could be conducted.

"The examination would reveal what is wrong with the verdict to be taken as a lesson in handling such cases in the future," he said.

Akbar appealed to the Supreme Court after the Jakarta High Court upheld the decision of the Central Jakarta District Court that sentenced Akbar to three years imprisonment for his involvement in a Rp 40 billion (US$4.8 million) graft case when he was state secretary in 1999.

Akbar is one of several government officials from president Soeharto's tenure who have gone on trial for corruption charges. Former chief of the National Logistics Agency (Bulog) Rahardi Ramelan is still appealing against a three-year prison sentence with the Supreme Court on similar charges.

Soeharto, who looks physically healthy, will likely continue to evade corruption charges as the court has found him unfit to stand trial.

Todung, however, said that if the Supreme Court had thrown out Akbar's appeal, the highly politicized case would have become a snow ball that would drag in many other parties that might also have received funds.

He said he feared the Supreme Court had made a decision based on a narrow perspective as four of the five judges who accepted Akbar's appeal argued that the defendant had just implemented former president B.J. Habibie's instruction to distribute basic commodities to the poor under the social safety net program.

Akbar was not guilty in the corruption case because he was just obeying the president's instruction, they argued.

Ombudsman Commission Chairman Antonius Sujata shared Todung's views, saying that the verdict itself and the tardy process to arrive at a verdict had damaged the judicial system's image.

"This is a miscarriage of justice. With this decision the public will have no more confidence in the judicial system and the government's efforts to stop corruption," he said.

He also said another factor that contributed to the disappointing verdict was that the panel of judges was presided over by a judge with the state administrative law background.

It is also unusual for the Supreme Court to issue such a long verdict as a verdict usually only consisted of 25 pages, he said.

He said, however, one thing that he was pleased about was that one of the judges put forward a dissenting opinion on the case.

"I respect this effort, which is a first in this country," he said.

Separately, Judicial Watch chairman A. Muhammad Asrun said the verdict was an indication that the Supreme Court was not free from outside interference.

"Akbar's acquittal of corruption charges has been predicted long before today when the Supreme Court repeatedly delayed the trial and announcing the verdict," he said.

The Jakarta Legal Aid Institute (LBH Jakarta) called on the Supreme Court to undertake total reform to repair the corrupt judiciary and to examine the panel of judges' decision.