No date set for Djoko S. Tjandra's new hearing

No date set for Djoko S. Tjandra's new hearing

JAKARTA (JP): The South Jakarta District Court has yet to set
a date for a new hearing of a corruption case involving Djoko S.
Tjandra in the high-profile Bank Bali scandal because the newly
appointed judge assigned to preside over the trial is ill.

Dimyati, a staffer at the court, said on Thursday that Judge
Romanna L. Pardede, who replaced R. Soenarto to lead the trial of
the controversial case, remained absent from the court due to
illness.

"We will only set the date for the hearing after she returns
to the court. Later, we'll immediately inform both prosecutor and
the defendant's lawyers about the date," he told The Jakarta
Post.

Soenarto, while leading a panel of district court judges
during a pretrial hearing on March 6, dropped the indictment
against defendant Djoko, saying the cessie contract between Bank
Bali and PT Era Giat Prima was illegal and therefore the judges
did not have the authority to try the case. He said the case
should be heard by a civil court.

The Bank Bali scandal centers around a transfer of Rp 546
billion (US$73.7 million) to PT Era Giat Prima as commission for
services in assisting the bank to recoup Rp 904 billion in
interbank loans.

The case drew public attention as part of the money was
reportedly transferred to the Golkar Party to finance the
presidential reelection campaign of then president B.J. Habibie.

Early this week, district court spokesman Soedarto said his
office had received a verdict from the Jakarta High Court, which
rejected the South Jakarta District Court's decision to drop the
case and instead ordered the court to continue the trial.

According to the high court, the decision was premature,
Soedarto said.

"The high court stated that the district court was not
supposed to touch the substance of the case in the pretrial
hearing," he said.

Soedarto's announcement of the high court verdict on the case
to the media upset one of Djoko's lawyers, Y.B. Purwaning M.
Yanuar.

"We are indeed ready to continue the hearing. But the
official's decision to publicly announce the verdict without
first informing the defendant's lawyer was unacceptable,"
Purwaning said, adding that Soedarto's move had violated court
ethics.

"The district court should inform both prosecutors and the
defendant's lawyers about the verdict before disclosing it to the
media," she said.

But Soedarto dismissed the allegation, saying it was his job
to provide information to the media and answer their questions.

"It is the spokesman's job to disclose any news related to the
district court to the media. We're in the era of transparency,
then why should we keep secret a verdict?," he said, adding that
he did not violate court ethics.

"The administrative staff of the court should automatically
send the verdict to both prosecutor and the lawyers," he said.
(asa)