IKAHI leaps to defend Manulife judges

IKAHI leaps to defend Manulife judges

Tiarma Siboro and Berni K. Moestafa, The Jakarta Post, Jakarta

The Indonesian Judges' Association (IKAHI) stepped in to
defend three of its members whom a government corruption watchdog
suspects of having taken bribes in a controversial bankruptcy
case that seriously damaged the already tarnished image of the
legal system here.

IKAHI accused the Public Servants' Wealth Audit Commission
(KPKPN) on Thursday of prematurely jumping to the conclusion that
the three judges had amassed their fortunes through bribery,
claiming that this violated the presumption of innocence.

IKAHI chairman Toton Suprapto warned the commission not to
lightly make public the wealth of judges or mislead the public
into believing judges were corrupt.

KPKPN chairman Jusuf Sjakir denied having done so.

"We're allowed to announce the wealth of public servants,
including declaring whether or not they obtained it properly," he
told reporters after a two-and-a-half-hour meeting with IKAHI
representatives at the commission's office.

He explained that the disagreement between the two bodies had
more to do with differences over the "philosophy of
transparency."

The KPKPN is investigating the wealth of the three judges who
declared Canada-based insurance firm PT Asuransi Jiwa Manulife
Indonesia (AJMI) bankrupt last June. The Supreme Court later
overturned the ruling on technicalities.

Three separate investigations into the judges have since been
launched following widespread public suspicion of bribery. The
two others are being conducted by teams from the Ministry of
Justice and Human Rights, and the Supreme Court respectively.

The investigations have put the wealth of members of the
judiciary into the media spotlight, wealth suspected of being
illicitly obtained from a legal system a visiting United Nations
expert said last month was infested with corruption.

Public servants, including judges, legislators and senior
government officials, must declare their wealth to the KPKPN.

One of the judges in the Manulife case, Kristipurnami, drew
the KPKPN's attention when it found out she owned undeclared
assets of around Rp 1.4 billion (about US$150,000).

She initially told the commission that her assets were worth
Rp 1.1 billion, a statement KPKPN officials now label a lie.

The undeclared money is kept in several joint accounts with
her daughter in Bank Mandiri.

Last April, Kristipurnami signed a statement saying that her
daughter worked for the lawyer who represented a former AJMI
shareholder with which Manulife had been locked in a two-year
legal dispute.

The document was prepared for the Australian Embassy to allow
her daughter to obtain a student visa. In it, she said she had
the financial means to support her daughter during her stay in
Australia.

Facing public scrutiny, Kristipurnami has now hired lawyers to
defend her.

"The KPKPN's examination is still at too early a stage to
suggest to the public that Kristi took bribes," said Indra S.
Lubis, one of the eight lawyers she has hired.

He said the commission had no "legal facts" to support its
claim. "We sense that there is a possibility of libel here," he
added, warning that his team might consider suing the KPKPN.

Indra said that Kristipurnami inherited the Rp 1.4 billion
from her husband, who told her to save it for their children's
education.

"Her husband died in 1993 and left her with US$38,000 in a
bank deposit ... over time her interest earnings caused it to
grow to Rp 1.4 billion," he explained.

Petrus Selestinus, a KPKPN official who examines the assets of
judicial officials, said Kristipurnami should have reported the
joint accounts nonetheless.

He said the KPKPN would examine her accounts in Bank Mandiri
next week to look for cash inflows other than interest earnings.

"If we find any signs of bribery, we'll hand the case over to
the police. This could happen by the end of this month," Petrus
said.

Earlier he said that judges earned between Rp 3 million and Rp
7 million a month. However, many judges in big cities were known
to spend up to Rp 1 billion in one year on houses or cars,
according to KPKPN reports.

Another judge in the Manulife case, Hasan Basri, has reported
assets of Rp 1.28 billion, which he claimed he had saved from his
earnings since 1969.

But he later admitted to the KPKPN that around 10 percent had
come from "gratitude money" litigants had paid him after he had
ruled in their favor.