Minister attacks justice advocates

Minister attacks justice advocates

YOGYAKARTA (JP): Many critics condemning a reversal of the
burden of proof for corruption cases were those who had
participated in construction of the web of corruption during the
New Order regime, Minister of Defense Mahfud MD said here on
Saturday.

Mahfud, in his capacity as a legal expert, told reporters on
the sidelines of a lecture at the Gadjah Mada University's school
of law, that people had voiced their opposition to the arrest of
Ginandjar Kartasasmita's for corruption out of fears of being
brought to justice for their own wrongdoings in the past.

"Corrupt politicians and officials have joined hands to go
against government policy and accuse the government of exploiting
the legal procedures as part of a political game to stab its
rivals," he said.

Mahfud cited as an example the arrest of People's Consultative
Assembly (MPR) deputy speaker Ginandjar, which many politicians
branded as a political maneuver rather than a legitimate legal
action.

"When Soeharto was still president, many figures, including
Amien Rais, had detected Ginandjar's corrupt actions in various
large projects, such as the Freeport mining project in Irian
Jaya. However, when President Abdurrahman Wahid had Ginandjar
arrested many 'reformists' and political leaders joined the
chorus to defend Ginandjar," he said.

Mahfud warned that political rivalry could terminate the
implementation of the reform agenda's objective to uphold legal
supremacy. He said government efforts to fight corruption were
frequently blocked by attacks from the government's political
rivals.

"How could they suddenly oppose something they themselves
advocated in the past?" he said.

Mahfud suggested that all parties unite to fight corruption,
which was the legacy of the New Order regime.

"They should not be confused between political maneuvers and
efforts to eradicate corruption," he said. "Law enforcement is at
stake. In the future we may regret the failure to enforce the law
merely due to chronic political quarrels."

Mahfud, known as one of President Abdurrahman's close aides,
however, regretted the President's sluggishness in ordering an
investigation into alleged corruption involving three
businessman: Sinivasan, Prajogo Pangestu and Syamsul Nur Salim.

"The President had no reason to suspend legal proceedings
against the three tycoons."

In Jakarta, lawyers defending alleged corruptors welcomed the
government's proposal to introduce a regulation on the shifting
of the burden of proof, but warned of the possible abuse of
people's basic rights.

Mohamad Assegaf, who is also an MPR member, said the shift of
the burden of proof should be regulated in a law and not just in
a government regulation, in lieu of the law.

"I think all of us gladly welcome the implementation of the
shift of the burden of proof. But such a new legal principle,
which concerns the public interest, should be regulated by a law,
deliberated by the House of Representatives.

"The government should not impose an emergency regulation
because it could raise suspicions that its introduction has been
used as a political tool by Gus Dur (Abdurrahman's nickname) to
attack his opponents," Assegaf told The Jakarta Post on Sunday.

Assegaf said the new system would not disadvantage the accused
as it was aimed at upholding the law and that legislators have
already anticipated the possibility that the system may violate
other legal principles.

"There will be regulations where the rights of the accused are
protected. The prosecutors should first prove the accused as
guilty before a court and then the judges give the defendant a
chance to prove his or her innocence," he said.

Denny Kailimang, chairman of the Indonesian Advocates
Association, said the law on the shifting of the burden of proof
should be imposed for specific corruption cases, such as bribery
and receiving gifts from state officials.

"However, it doesn't mean that when a state official obtains a
new luxury car the state prosecutors can immediately ask them to
disclose how they got the car.

"Such measures can only be taken, after a case that implicates
the state official, has been submitted to the prosecutors."
(44/bby)