'Improve intelligence unit to find Tommy'

The police's weeklong involvement with Tommy's (son of former president Soeharto) bunker has captured the nation's imagination while Tommy still remains at large. Legal expert Harkristuti Harkrisnowo says that the police must improve their intelligence unit in order to find the fugitive.

Question: Although it sounds less than tactful, the police have announced on several occasions their plans in finding Tommy (Hutomo Mandala Putra), what do you think?

Answer: This relates to intelligence. I wonder why the police feel they have to inform the press about the plan. It's not particularly intelligent behavior if the police always announce their plans. It seems to me that the police simply want to show that they are doing something.

I don't understand their thinking. They should have said that they would do something, without elaborating.

I understand why journalists, on the other hand, are always seeking news. It's their job and it's hard to avoid the press. But there should have been attempts made not to leak information to the press. Let the press wait and see. If they announce their plans, the fugitive will obviously flee.

Since the police announced, in advance, the drilling of the bunker, do you think there is a hidden plot in this case?

I'd say that the public may speculate that there is something askew. It's so obvious when the press report the plan on the day the police start drilling. Again, it's clear that the police shouldn't have informed the press about their action. It would be wise for them to take a low profile. I don't have any idea as to whether they informed the press on purpose. It just becomes dubious if the police don't realize the impact (of providing information to the press prior to their actions) of their actions.

What do you think about the breaking in of the bunker, does such an action need any warrant?

The law in Indonesia does not really recognize the role of a judge in seizing property. Compared to the U.S. or East Timor, for instance, search warrants must be approved by judges. Here, investigating officers are free to do any related action as long as it is considered useful.

So, from the legal point of view, we don't have any clear regulations on this matter. It is not clear if it (the breaking of the bunker) is illegal. The police also have the right to carry out related actions in the investigation.

In the future, when we have a truly workable judiciary system, it is important to give the courts the right to provide warrants for the police in taking forceful action.

How do you see the escape of Tommy?

Firstly, the prosecutors' office is the most responsible party. I think the public have been well informed, that through his lawyers, Tommy said he was unwilling to go to prison. He said that he was threatened. This showed that he didn't want to go to jail. The prosecutors' office should always have been alert. It's not a very bright thing to do, giving a convict the chance to escape.

So it's normal if the public may have thought, despite whether it is true or not, that there is foul play behind this case.

What things may have happened behind the scenes, particularly after President Abdurrahman Wahid (Gus Dur) declined Tommy's appeal for a pardon?

Personally, I don't have any idea about the reported meeting between Gus Dur and Tommy at Hotel Borobudur, and what it meant.

It's not proper for Gus Dur to meet Tommy as a convict. In addition, although he is a cleric, Gus Dur is the President of a nation and the meeting was held outside an official location.

This isn't normal and has naturally prompted public speculation.

In addition, there was a period after the rejection (of Tommy's appeal for a pardon) and before Tommy was found to be at large. Again, I think the prosecutor's office should have been able to do something, for instance, by arresting Tommy immediately after the rejection.

As you see, there are many abnormalities in this case, what will the impact be to our legal system?

Yes, there are so many improprieties here that make many, including myself, think that some parties are not really serious in upholding the supremacy of the law.

The impact is very bad. Some people may think that the law is discriminative. They may think that, as a son of a former president, Tommy is untouchable.

But last September, the Supreme Court did sentence Tommy to 18 months in prison for his involvement in a land exchange deal with the State Logistics Agency (Bulog) in 1995. Though some people think this is only a trivial case, at least it shows that someone belonging to the former first family can be taken to face trial...

Yes. I'd say, however, that it's not a matter of how big or small the case is. Tommy is not the only one who wielded power in the past. Now we see that some important people in the past are also being brought to trial.

But this will be a kind of test case. Are we able to handle these cases and bring justice? People will be even more disrespectful and disobedient to the law when they find out that there is no justice. There will instead be street justice.

Do you think that people will take justice into their own hands when the nation fails to show the justice they want to see?

People are seeking real facts. The police and the prosecutors' office must show they are serious in their duties.

In the case of Tommy, the intelligence unit must work harder. I know it is expensive. But can't they do something? At least they could seek some help from psychics? (I. Christianto)