Legal loopholes abound in Tommy's 15-year verdict
Berni K. Moestafa and Tertiani ZB Simanjuntak, The Jakarta Post, Jakarta
Amid the cheers following the sentencing of former president Soeharto's son, Hutomo "Tommy" Mandala Putra, to 15 years in jail, legal experts warned on Saturday of flaws in the verdict that could lead a higher court overturning it.
The Central Jakarta District Court declared the playboy businessman guilty on Friday of illegal arms possession, evading a jail sentence for graft and ordering the murder of Justice Syafiuddin Kartasasmita, who had earlier ordered him sent him to jail.
Criminal law expert Rudy Satrio of the University of Indonesia highlighted the light sentence in comparison to the crimes committed, each of which -- apart from evading justice -- carried a maximum penalty of death.
National Law Commission (KHN) member Frans Hendra Winarta, said the sentence went "against the legal textbooks" as the judge's two assassins had earlier been sentenced to life terms.
"As the mastermind behind the murder of the judge, Tommy deserves a life sentence," Frans told The Jakarta Post.
Rudy cited another loophole: the fact that the police failed to secure a court warrant before seizing firearms and ammunition believed to be belong to Tommy at two different locations.
"The seizure of the evidence in this case is invalid without a warrant. Tommy's defense lawyers will possibly use this argument on appeal in the Jakarta High Court," he told the Post.
By law, the defense team has one week to file an appeal.
The legal experts said Tommy's absence during the delivery of the verdict was another glaring flaw that they said might affect the appeal ruling, or at least serve as another delaying tactic to gain time for "negotiations" that could lead to the verdict's annulment.
The panel of five judges, presided over by Judge Amiruddin Zakaria, delivered the verdict in the absence of the defendant, who claimed to have diarrhea, which his doctors said was the result of stress.
The seemingly upset defense lawyers walked out of court, insisting on the presence of their client, who is currently detained in Cipinang prison in East Jakarta.
Based the 1997 Supreme Court rules on court jurisdiction, the judges said the presence of the defendant at the handing down of the verdict was not necessary as the court had heard his defense pleas in the earlier hearings.
The rules, set out in what is popularly known as the Brown Book, says this is allowed and does not violate Law No. 8/1981 on the Criminal Code Procedures.
However, Article 196 (1) of the Criminal Code Procedures states that the verdict must be delivered in the presence of the defendant.
Rudy expressed fears that the Tommy verdict could be overturned should the High Court judges take the contradicting regulations into consideration. "We cannot rule out this possibility," he said.
National Ombudsman Commission chairman Antonius Sujata said that this legal ambiguity could only benefit Tommy.
"The law on the criminal code procedures is higher in the legal hierarchy than the Supreme Court's internal rules," Antonius said.
Rudy's colleague, Harkristuti Harkrisnowo, supported the judges' decision, saying that based upon Article 195 of the Criminal Code Procedures a ruling is invalid only if it is not delivered in public.
"The Article 196 itself says that a verdict may be delivered in the absence of the defendant, but the court should later convey the verdict directly to the defendant," she said.
The court handed down its verdict on Tommy late on Friday evening.
Attorney General's Office spokesman Barman Zahir said the judges' decision to proceed in Tommy's absence was in compliance with the legal principles of simple and speedy justice.
Tommy's legal journey
Oct. 14, 1999: The district court exonerates Tommy in a Rp 95.4 billion corruption case that revolved around a 1995 land swap scam.
Sept. 22, 1999: The Supreme Court overturns the trial court's ruling and sentences Tommy to 18 months in jail.
Nov. 2, 2000: Former President Abdurrahman Wahid turns down Tommy's petition for clemency.
Nov. 3, 2000: The search for the fugitive Tommy starts after he goes on the run to avoid serving his jail term.
July 26, 2001: Justice Syaifuddin Kartasasmita is killed in a drive-by assassination. He was a member of the panel of judges who sentenced Tommy.
Aug. 7, 2001: Jakarta Police and local military command personnel discover firearms and explosives at an apartment in Central Jakarta and a house in Pondok Indah, South Jakarta, which are linked to Tommy and the killing of Syafiuddin.
Oct. 1, 2001: In a Supreme Court review, another panel of justices acquits Tommy of corruption.
Nov. 29, 2001: Police arrest Tommy while he is sleeping at a friend's house in South Jakarta. Investigation starts.
March 7, 2002: Tommy is charged with masterminding the murder of Syafiuddin, illegal possession of arms and evading justice. He faces the death penalty.
March 20, 2002: Tommy's trial begins.
April 17, 2002: The widow of the slain Syafiuddin tells the court of Tommy's threats and bribery attempts.
April 24, 2002: Syafiuddin's two assassins claim that Tommy has nothing to do with the murder and that their earlier statements to investigators, witnessed by their lawyers, were engineered by the police.
May 6, 2002: Police detain Tommy's lawyer Elza Syarief for two weeks on charges of attempting to pervert the course of justice by bribing three witnesses to lie about weapons that had been found.
May 8, 2002: Syafiuddin's two assassins are found guilty and receive life sentences.
June 26, 2002: Tommy takes the stand and denies involvement in the justice's murder but claims he had attempted to bribe former president Abdurrahman Wahid's aides to get a pardon.
July 15, 2002: Prosecutors say they believe Tommy will be convicted of the murder of the Supreme Court Justice but only seek a 15-year sentence for Tommy.
July 26, 2002: The court accepts the prosecution recommendation and sentences Tommy to serve 15 years in jail.