Military Prosecutor Reveals Reasons for Rejecting Merger of Case Files for Defendants in Bank Branch Manager Murder Case

REPUBLIKA.CO.ID, JAKARTA – The Military Prosecutor from the Military Prosecutor’s Office II-07 Jakarta, Major (Chk) Wasinton Marpaung, has revealed the reasons why his side rejected combining the case files of the defendants in the alleged kidnapping and murder of a bank branch manager in Jakarta. This was in response to the objection note (exception) filed by the defendants’ legal counsel in a hearing held on Monday (13/4/2026).

The defence lawyers’ argument regarding differences in roles and contributions, suggesting that the case would be more appropriate if split/separated into case files, is unfounded and must be rejected,” said Wasinton during the reading of the response to the defendants’ exception in the Military Court II-08 Jakarta, Cakung, East Jakarta, on Wednesday (15/4/2026).

The defendants, namely Serka MN (defendant 1), Kopda FH (defendant 2), and Serka FY (defendant 3), are charged with involvement in a series of kidnappings accompanied by the murder of MIP. In his response, Wasinton assessed that the objection regarding the request for splitting the case files lacks legal basis and actually contradicts the interests of proof.

In criminal procedure law practice, said Wasinton, splitting case files is a discretionary authority of the public prosecutor carried out solely for the interests of proof if necessary.

“Splitting is not a right of the defendant or the legal counsel. Therefore, the failure to split the case files cannot be used as a reason to weaken the indictment,” explained Wasinton.

In this case, the Military Prosecutor believes that the proof process can be carried out optimally without the need to split the case files. This means that all elements of the charged criminal offence can still be proven intact in one case file.

Furthermore, he emphasised that there is no legal provision requiring cases with more than one defendant to be separated. Thus, the legal counsel’s argument that the failure to split makes the indictment legally flawed is deemed inappropriate.

Wasinton also explained that combining cases into one file provides significant benefits in the judicial process, namely facilitating the proof of the interrelation between the defendants’ actions, so that the series of criminal events can be seen in full and comprehensively.

In addition, combining cases is also seen as able to avoid the potential for conflicting decisions if the cases are examined separately. This is considered important to maintain consistency and legal certainty.

“Combining the defendants’ cases into one case file is also in line with the principles of simple, quick, and low-cost justice,” said Wasinton.