Marcella's Rebuttal Raises Concerns About Judicial Mafia: Parasites Eroding Justice

Advocate Marcella Santoso, the defendant in a case involving alleged bribery of judges and Money Laundering Offences (TPPU), raised concerns about judicial mafia during rebuttal proceedings held on Friday (27 February) evening.

Marcella claimed she was not judicial mafia but rather a victim.

“My fellow advocates and I are extremely vulnerable to becoming victims of judicial mafia. I am not judicial mafia. I am actually a victim of parasites eroding justice,” Marcella said at the Corruption Crimes Court (Tipikor) at the Jakarta Central District Court on Friday (27 February).

Marcella stated that judicial mafia constitutes parasites eroding the process of seeking justice in society. The victims of such parasites are not only justice seekers but also law enforcement officials, including advocates who occupy the most vulnerable position as they are not part of those protected by state power.

Marcella said these parasites peddle terror, fear and false confidence.

“These parasites cause justice seekers to build expectations based not on legal arguments and facts presented at trial, but on non-legal forces,” she said.

Marcella stated that this resulted in justice seekers repeatedly being shown that legal certainty is guaranteed by forces outside the law.

However, she clarified, legal certainty should be guaranteed by the judges’ bench.

Therefore, Marcella appealed to the government to rescue her fellow advocates and law students from parasites eroding justice.

“Punishing me to the maximum will not eliminate these parasites. The parasites will simply move on and erode others,” she said.

“What needs to be done is to build a system that truly protects the legal profession from such parasitic practices,” she added.

Marcella stated that the trial revealed parties attempting to contact her and sell terror through various means. She even mentioned requests for money from law enforcement officials to her staff at Aryanto Arnaldo Law Firm with the purpose of making contact with relevant parties.

“I chose to avoid contact. I never agreed, never approved, and never met with such parties,” she stated firmly.

Marcella dismissed the prosecution’s allegations that she committed money laundering.

She argued that the prosecution’s claim for replacement money was based solely on photographs taken by finance staff.

Meanwhile, other evidence including US$2 million in cash, transfers exceeding US$100,000, and the financial profile of others who received bribes were ignored.

“Forensic accountant analysis shows my financial profile is adequate. The Rp24 billion referred to as proceeds of crime is legal fees. These funds came from private clients, not state money. Legal fees were paid according to proposals, legal service agreements, invoices, and transfer receipts submitted at trial,” she explained.

Marcella claimed she never promised case success and did not commit bribery. She said all work was conducted professionally and demonstrated at trial.

Therefore, she argued, applying money laundering statutes without regard to temporal and relevance factors constitutes a dangerous precedent for law enforcement.

“Do not let hatred toward me become justification for applying the law disproportionately,” she said.

Previously, Marcella Santoso was charged with 17 years imprisonment in the case involving alleged bribery of judges and money laundering.

“[The bench is requested] to impose a sentence on defendant Marcella Santoso of 17 years imprisonment,” the prosecutor said when reading out the indictment at the Corruption Crimes Court (Tipikor) at Jakarta Central District Court on Wednesday (18 February) afternoon.

The prosecutor also sought to have Marcella fined Rp600 million, alternatively 150 days imprisonment.

Additionally, the prosecutor sought to have the bench impose supplementary penalties on Marcella including an obligation to pay replacement funds totalling Rp21,602,138,412, alternatively 8 years imprisonment.

The prosecutor also sought to have the bench order the advocate organisation to bar Marcella from her profession.

The verdict reading in this case is scheduled for Tuesday, 3 March.

Marcella is being prosecuted for allegedly bribing judges of the Corruption Crimes Court in Jakarta who handled cases involving Permata Hijau Group, PT Wilmar Group and PT Musim Mas Group in a crude palm oil (CPO) and derivative export corruption case for the period January-April 2022 with funds totalling Rp40 billion.

The criminal conduct was carried out by Marcella together with several other defendants: Ariyanto and Juanedi Saibih, also advocates, and M. Syafei as representatives of Wilmar Group, Permata Hijau Group, and Musim Mas Group.

Marcella, Ariyanto and M. Syafei are also accused of money laundering.