Jakarta court rejects Mega supporter's suit

JAKARTA (JP): The South Jakarta District Court ruled yesterday that it did not have the jurisdiction to continue hearing a lawsuit lodged by a supporter of Megawati Soekarnoputri against a former chief of the Jakarta Police Detectives.

Presiding judge Romana L. Pardede said the court could not try the defendant, Col. Paimin A.B., because he was a resident of Tangerang, West Java. The judge cited his identity card and one of his three family cards which contained an address at the Bintaro Jaya housing complex in Tangerang.

Paimin's lawyers had argued for the ruling.

Sandra Fertasari Putri, a supporter of the Indonesian Democratic Party's (PDI) ousted leader Megawati, filed a lawsuit against Paimin in April for allegedly sexually harassing her while in detention last July.

Sandra claims that, while she was detained at Pondok Bambu women's prison, Paimin used words and body language to sexually harass her.

Her claim says that Paimin "urged her to have sexual intercourse rather than choose the PDI".

The plaintiff had sought Rp 500 million (US$208,000) in damages.

In the last hearing on June 3, the defendant's lawyers submitted three family cards and one identity card as evidence. The family cards contained different home addresses.

All the cards were issued a day before the last hearing.

Sandra's lawyers said that at the May 20 hearing the defendant's lawyers had not objected to their client's address for the lawsuit being in South Jakarta.

Sandra and 123 others were detained pending trial from July to November last year following the bloody riots sparked by the takeover of PDI's headquarters by supporters of the party's government-sanctioned chairman, Soerjadi, on July 27.

At least five people were killed and 23 went missing in the riots.

The Central Jakarta District Court sentenced Sandra and another 114 Megawati supporters to four months and three days in jail in November after finding them guilty of ignoring a police order to disperse during the July 27 riots.

They were freed on the day of the verdict because the sentence matched the defendants' terms of detention. (05)