Judge prepares coercive measures to summon key witness in Jakarta bank branch head case
Jakarta (ANTARA) - The panel of judges at the Military Court II-08 Jakarta will resort to coercive measures against a key witness in the trial concerning the alleged kidnapping and murder of the bank branch head with initials MIP (37).
“If they refuse to attend, report it to the panel. We can issue a determination for forced summons,” said the Presiding Judge, Colonel Chk Fredy Ferdian Isnartanto, at the Military Court II-08 Jakarta, Cakung, East Jakarta, on Monday.
This statement follows the absence of the key witness, deemed essential for revealing material facts in the case.
Fredy assessed that the witness’s attitude of ignoring the court summons without a valid reason could hinder the judicial process. Moreover, in criminal cases, a witness’s attendance is a legal obligation.
Every person who knows, sees, or directly experiences a criminal event is obliged to provide testimony before the court.
“This is a criminal trial that requires material proof. If the witness refuses to attend, the judicial process could fall apart,” he explained.
The judge also opened the possibility of further steps if the witness remains uncooperative after forced summons.
In certain circumstances, legal action may be taken against a witness who deliberately ignores the obligation to appear in court.
Meanwhile, the Military Prosecutor from the Military Prosecutor’s Office II-07 Jakarta, Major (Chk) Wasinton Marpaung, previously revealed that his side had issued a summons to the key witness.
However, the witness only sent a letter expressing objections to attending due to fears that their testimony would incriminate them in a case at the Jakarta East District Court.
According to Wasinton, this reason is not legally justifiable. He assured that they would reissue the summons to the witness in accordance with the panel’s directions.
“For the next hearing, we will endeavour to bring them back. If they still do not attend, we will certainly follow the existing mechanisms, including the possibility of coercive measures,” said Wasinton.
Besides the key witness, another witness also did not attend the hearing. This witness is known to be on official duty at the East Java Provincial Police, so their absence can still be considered.
Of the seven witnesses summoned to attend and provide testimony, only four complied, namely Antonius Aditia Majarjuna (witness 4), Yohanes Joko Pamuntas (witness 5), Muhamad Umri (witness 6), and David Setia Darmawan (witness 7).
The defendants in this case are Serka MN (defendant 1), Kopda FH (defendant 2), and Serka FY (defendant 3), who are charged with involvement in a series of kidnappings accompanied by the murder of MIP.
The military prosecutor uses a combined indictment structure that includes primary, subsidiary, more subsidiary, alternative, and cumulative charges against the defendants.
The main charge submitted is Article 340 of the Criminal Code on premeditated murder. In this construction, the defendants are alleged to have planned the actions in advance that resulted in the victim’s death.
The prosecutor also prepared other layers of charges in anticipation if the elements of premeditated murder cannot be perfectly proven in court, namely the subsidiary Article 338 of the Criminal Code on murder, subsidiary to Article 351 paragraph 3 regarding assault causing death.
In addition, the prosecutor submitted alternative charges under Article 333 paragraph 3 of the Criminal Code concerning deprivation of liberty that causes death.
The defendants are also subject to cumulative charges under Article 181 of the Criminal Code, which regulates the act of concealing a corpse. This article indicates allegations of attempts to eliminate traces or obscure facts after the victim’s death event.