Legal loopholes abound in Tommy's 15-year verdict
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.