Lawsuit against attorney general fabricated: Experts

Lawsuit against attorney general fabricated: Experts

JAKARTA (JP): The move by former president Soeharto's lawyers
to file a lawsuit against Attorney General Marzuki Darusman was
merely to seek a legal loophole to free their client from all the
corruption charges, legal experts said on Saturday.

Loebby Loqman and Frans Hendra Winarta said the lawyers were
trying to halt the investigation into the former president's
alleged corruption practices during his 32-year tenure through
the pretrial lawsuit, which was filed with the South Jakarta
District Court last Wednesday.

"Lawyers of the former president might have been cornered with
the move by the Attorney General's Office to step up pressure on
its investigation into the former president.

"Therefore, they filed the pretrial lawsuit (to halt the
investigation)," Loebby told reporters after a law seminar at
Hotel Indonesia in Central Jakarta.

The lawsuit came only two days after the Attorney General's
Office issued a ruling on Monday last week that former president
Soeharto be put under house arrest.

In the lawsuit, Soeharto demanded the district court declare
that an Oct. 11, 1999 decree of the office, which halted the
investigation into Soeharto's alleged corruption practices, was
lawful.

The former president also urged the district court to declare
as unlawful the office's April 13, 2000 decree which put him
under city arrest, the office's May 29, 2000 decree which
converted the city arrest status into the house arrest status and
the office's decree to prolong his arrest period from May 29 to
June 11.

Winarta shared Loebby's opinion, saying that the lawyers of
the former president were seeking ways to render the office's
Oct. 11, 1999 decree as lawful.

"If the district court decides to meet the former president's
demand, then the office's investigation must be halted," he told
The Jakarta Post on Saturday.

Winarta regretted such efforts, saying that the investigation
into the alleged corruption practices by the former president was
the responsibility of all legal apparatus, including the lawyers
themselves.

"Indeed, the lawyers must be loyal to their client. But, they
have sworn to God that they would also uphold truth and justice,"
he said.

Winarta said the pretrial lawsuit was irrelevant to secure the
court's ruling that the Oct. 11, 1999 decree was lawful.

"The pretrial lawsuit can only be lodged with the district
court, if someone's basic rights have been violated when he or
she was under police custody," he cited an example.

Winarta argued that a December 1999 decree by Marzuki Darusman
did not violate the former president's basic rights.

"It's the authority of the Attorney General to issue or to
revoke such ruling, including to prolong the detention period,"
he said.

Marzuki Darusman, who replaced acting Attorney General
Ismudjoko in November last year, ordered the office to reopen the
investigation into the former president in December last year, by
revoking the Oct. 11 decree, issued by his predecessor.

Marzuki said, without going into details, that his office had
discovered new evidence eligible to reopen investigation into the
former president.

One of Soeharto's lawyers Denny Kailimang, however, denied
that the lawyers had sought a loophole in the investigation of
the former president.

He said the lawyers filed the lawsuit after the Attorney
General's Office had made some fatal administrative mistakes.

"After revoking the Oct. 11, 1999 decree in December last
year, the office never sent a copy of the decree to our client,
as requested by Article 75 of the Criminal Code.

"The office also never mentioned new evidence found on the
December decree which revoked the Oct. 11 decree. Without new
evidence, the office couldn't reopen the investigation," Denny
told the Post.

Denny said the Attorney General's Office did not have the
authority to set Soeharto's arrest status.

"The Attorney General's Office doesn't have any authority to
decide on Soeharto's arrest status, since it's only an
investigating institution.

"It's the Jakarta Prosecutor's Office which has authority to
decide on Soeharto's arrest status, because it's the prosecuting
institution," he said.

The pretrial hearing of the case is set for next Wednesday.
(dja/asa)