Judge says Hendra's pretrial win doesn't mean early release

JAKARTA (JP): Wanted suspect Hendra Rahardja may have won the pretrial lawsuit on Friday that he filed against the National Police Headquarters, but it does not mean that he will be released from prison in Australia, the presiding judge said.

"The plaintiff has not been tried for his alleged crime in Indonesia, so how can he be freed? Since his arrest in Australia last year, he has not been tried (here)," presiding judge Abdul Madjid told reporters, after he gave the shocking verdict at a hearing in the South Jakarta District Court.

"This pretrial was not held to decide whether Hendra's alleged actions were wrong or right. The lawsuit was filed to determine whether or not the procedures of the Indonesian National Police were correct in the case of Hendra Rahardja."

Lawyer Lt. Col. Alfons Loemau of the National Police Headquarters separately shared Madjid's opinion, saying that the court did not have the right to judge the legality of the National Police warrant to arrest Hendra, since it was only a pretrial.

Hendra, an older brother of escaped prisoner Eddy Tansil, who is still at large after bribing wardens and walking out of Cipinang Penitentiary four years ago, filed the lawsuit with the district court earlier this month. It challenged the lawfulness of Hendra's arrest by the Australian Police in Sydney on June 1 last year.

Earlier, judge Madjid told the hearing that the court accepted the plaintiff's lawsuit because the Indonesian National Police could not prove before the court that Hendra had been arrested "due to his money laundering activities."

"Hendra's lawyer Farida Sulistyani gave the court a letter from the Australian government that Hendra has never been listed as having committed a crime in Australia," Madjid said.

In response to the court's verdict, lawyer Loemau said that the National Police would not back down despite Hendra's victory.

"We will appeal to the Supreme Court within seven days. The district court's verdict today (Friday) is a fine example of how a court can violate the law. Hendra was arrested by the Australian Police in Sydney, Australia," Loemau told reporters following the verdict at the district court.

"This lawsuit should logically be filed in Australia. Hendra was apprehended on a Red Notice, which was issued by Indonesian Interpol and circulated through the Interpol network. But, he was arrested in Australia. Not here," he said.

The Red Notice, Loemau said, was issued because Hendra, a notorious and a wanted criminal, had fled the country.

When a criminal flees a country, he said, the concerning country has the right to spread the information worldwide and demand other countries arrest the criminal should they spot the person and bring the fugitive back to the country he or she had fled from.

"The Indonesian National Police has proof that Hendra transferred funds worth A$500 million (Rp 2.5 trillion) to his accounts in Australia, and that is why he fled the country in November 1997, following the liquidation of two of his banks, Bank Harapan Sentosa (BHS) and Bank Guna International," Loemau said.

"Hendra is appealing in the Australian Federal Court in Sydney, because he does not want to be extradited to Indonesia. Being an Indonesian national, he does not want to bow before Indonesian Law." (ylt)