Metro Jaya Police Expert Admits Not Reading Roy Suryo's Pretrial Ruling, Hearing Marked by Debate

A pretrial hearing in the alleged defamation and slander case against Joko Widodo involving Roy Suryo at the South Jakarta District Court on Monday (3/8) was marked by a debate between Roy’s legal counsel, Abdul Gafur Sangadji, and criminal law expert Hendri Jayadi Pandiangan. Hendri was presented by the Metro Jaya Police as the respondent to provide testimony during the evidentiary phase.

The debate began when Abdul Gafur questioned whether Hendri had read the previous pretrial ruling that forms the basis of the current compensation claim being examined by the court. ‘Were you ever given the previous pretrial ruling by the respondent, and did you read it, did you study it?’ Abdul Gafur asked the expert.

Responding to the question, Hendri admitted he had received a copy of the ruling but had not read it. ‘With permission, Your Honour, I was indeed given the ruling but I did not read it,’ Hendri replied. The admission was immediately challenged by Abdul Gafur, who questioned the basis of the expert’s legal opinion without reading the ruling that is the object of the hearing. ‘How can you know the contents of the ruling if you did not read it?’ Abdul Gafur asked.

Hendri then explained that he had studied the documents provided by investigators. However, he deliberately chose not to read the pretrial ruling to maintain objectivity and avoid being influenced by the case material. ‘The thing is, I was provided with documents by the investigators. I read them. I looked at them. Then I studied them. But with permission, Your Honour, I must be objective in viewing this. The content of that ruling is indeed as you said, there is a consideration by the judge because of that. But, but, I do not want to be contaminated in the main case. I am limiting myself to matters relating to the pretrial concerning wrongful detention,’ Hendri explained.

Abdul Gafur again questioned this reasoning, pointing out that the matter being examined was a pretrial hearing, not the main criminal case. ‘Do you mean the main case, the criminal case, or the main pretrial case? What we are hearing is a pretrial, not the main criminal act,’ he stated.

The debate was briefly interrupted by the sole judge, I Ketut Darpawan, who asked the expert to continue his explanation. ‘Enough, enough. Please continue, listen,’ the judge said.

Responding to the question, Hendri stressed that he had no intention of assessing the judge’s decision. He stated his presence in court was solely to explain the normative provisions regarding compensation claims under the Criminal Procedure Code. ‘I do not have the capacity to assess that because I uphold the principle of res judicata. I speak in this trial based on the example of the law, we dissect Article 173 based on my expertise. Whether that will influence the decision, that is up to Your Honour,’ Hendri said.

The hearing on Monday was the third pretrial motion filed by Roy Suryo. In his petition, Roy is demanding material and immaterial compensation of Rp206 million from the Metro Jaya Police for an arrest and detention that a previous pretrial ruling had declared unlawful. After the evidentiary phase from the respondent concluded, the judge scheduled the hearing to continue with the submission of conclusions on Tuesday (4/8). ‘Tomorrow, conclusions, as usual, at 2 p.m. WIB, no reading,’ the sole judge stated.