Mukhlas refuses to testify against Samudra

Mukhlas refuses to testify against Samudra

Wahyoe Boediwardhana, The Jakarta Post, Denpasar, Bali

Prosecutors in the trial of the alleged mastermind of the Bali
bombing, Imam Samudra, lost a chance of securing more
incriminating evidence on Wednesday after witness Ali Gufron
alias Mukhlas refused to testify against the defendant.

Mukhlas, who marked his entry to the court room with an
exchange of yells praising God with the defendant, flatly
rejected presiding judge I Nyoman Sugawa's request for him to
take an oath, the normal process for a witness before giving
testimony.

While the judge and Mukhlas were debating the procedure, the
defendant's chief lawyer Qadhar Faisal intervened, defending the
witness's arguments. Qadhar said that according to Article 168 of
the Criminal Code, Mukhlas was under no legal obligation to take
an oath nor to testify.

Article 168 states that any person who is a blood relation of
the defendant or is being prosecuted in the same case as the
defendant, has the legal right not to testify against the
defendant.

Mukhlas is also standing trial for his alleged role in last
October's bomb attack on Bali, which left 202 people dead, mostly
foreign tourists.

Like Samudra, Mukhlas is being charged with planning and
organizing the bombings, a crime that carries the death penalty
under the new antiterrorism law.

A legal battle ensued that, curiously, pitted the lawyers
against the judges, instead of against the prosecutors. Judge
Sugawa countered the lawyers' move by citing the Supreme Court's
decision dated March 21, 1990, to admit exceptions to Article
168.

However, the lawyers, quoting Supreme Court Practice Direction
No. 1174/1994, insisted on keeping Mukhlas from testifying.

"We reject the lawyers' objections. Therefore, the witness is
instructed to take the oath and present his testimony," Sugawa
said.

Mukhlas was adamant, and when Sugawa repeated his order, the
witness simply shook his head and said "No!".

Previously, Mukhlas had also refused to testify against his
younger brother, Amrozi. Mukhlas was among eight witnesses
summoned to the trial on Wednesday.

Chief prosecutor I Nyoman Dila later intervened, asking the
judges to admit Mukhlas' police interrogation file as evidence in
place of oral testimony.

The judges accepted the prosecution suggestion and asked Dila
to read the summary of the file before the court.

In the file, Mukhlas admitted that the idea to carry out the
bombings came from Samudra. The defendant also ordered Amrozi to
purchase explosives, Mukhlas to provide the funds and appointed
himself the field coordinator for the bomb attacks.

Earlier in the day, the lead prosecutor in the Mukhlas trial,
Banjar Nahor, demanded that the trial continue despite the
defendant's attempt to retract the statement he had given to
police.

Claiming that he had been under severe physical and
psychological duress during the interrogation, Mukhlas retracted
his statement in Monday's session.

Referring to the alleged duress, Banjar Nahor stated that as
it took place in an area outside the Bali Police headquarters so
it could not considered to have taken place as part of the formal
investigation.

"The defendant was always accompanied by his lawyers during
the interrogation, so the file was compiled in a way that was in
accordance with the law," Nahor told the court.

The court will present its ruling on the matter next Monday.