Justice Adi praised and criticized

Justice Adi praised and criticized

JAKARTA (JP): A judge who blew the whistle on alleged bribery
in the Supreme Court has received the support of another senior
legal official, but has been criticized by his superior for
failing to consult his seniors.

Chief Justice Soerjono said yesterday that his office would
study a letter that Deputy Chief Justice for General Crimes Adi
Andojo Soetjipto sent to the Jakarta Prosecutors' Office
requesting a review of a document fraud case. Adi has publicly
said that bribery is rampant in the Supreme Court and that a
senior judge might have taken a bribe of Rp 1.4 billion
(US$600,000) from a defendant in the case.

"We have created a team to investigate whether there's truth
in Adi's allegation," Soerjono said after meeting with President
Soeharto.

"I regret, however, that Adi did not inform me or Vice Chief
Justice Muhammad Djaelani, as his superiors, before sending the
letter," he said.

Soerjono also said that Adi's decision to send the letter,
which he reportedly wrote on unofficial letter paper, was not a
legally recognized practice.

"A judge can only inform disputing parties of legal measures
that could be taken once a court reaches a decision, but he
cannot ask the prosecutor's office for a review," he said. "It's
the authority of the prosecutors' office to decide whether to ask
a court for a review."

Attorney General Singgih however disclosed yesterday that the
prosecutors' office can actually probe the alleged collusion in
the Supreme Court without waiting for a request for a review of
the case.

He said: "With the President's approval, the prosecutors'
office can even make arrests" if it finds evidence of Supreme
Court senior judges' involvement in the alleged collusion.

Singgih reiterated that the prosecutors' office has the
authority to investigate if there is evidence that Supreme Court
judges committed crimes. This authority is guaranteed by Law No.
14/1985, he said.

The Attorney General's office is currently considering whether
to review the case of the document fraud. Singgih said, however,
the prosecutors' office can proceed with an investigation and not
wait until his office completes reviewing the case.

In addition, Singgih said, everybody still has to wait for the
results of the investigation team that Soerjono has mentioned.

"The results of the Supreme Court's Coordinator for Special
Supervision may be used to indict the senior judges," he said.

Singgih said his office was not sitting back on the case. "We
have started collecting data," he said.

The alleged collusion became public after a recent edition of
Forum Keadilan magazine revealed the secret letter from Adi to
the Jakarta Prosecutors' Office.

Adi asked the office to review the Supreme Court's decision to
acquit Ram Gulumal of charges of unlawful land procurement for
the construction of the Indian Gandhi Memorial International
School in Ancol, North Jakarta.

The magazine reported that Gulumal's acquittal had sparked
controversy among senior judges because there were indications
that the judge presiding over the case had received a bribe of Rp
1.4 billion to acquit the defendant.

Adi Andojo reportedly asked the Prosecutor's Office to also
delay the implementation of the Supreme Court decision, which
ruled last July that the charges against Gulumal for falsifying
documents could not be proven.

Gulumal, 57, an Indian national who came to Indonesia in 1957,
is the principal at the first Gandhi Memorial School located in
Pasar Baru, Central Jakarta. The school itself was founded by the
Bombay Merchants Association in 1950.

In 1973, Gulumal sent an application to the governor of
Jakarta to buy 10,000 square meters of land in Ancol. He later
built the Gandhi Memorial International School on the land.

The allegation that he falsified document was made in 1991 by
the association's new management, which controls the management
of the Indian school.

Gulumal was sentenced by the Central Jakarta District Court in
1993 to one year in prison for falsifying documents to acquire
the land and permits necessary for establishing the new school.

The verdict was upheld by the Jakarta High Court on appeal but
the sentence reduced to eight months.(imn)