'Oki can be prosecuted here'

JAKARTA (JP): The prosecutors of Harnoko Dewantono, alias Oki, the alleged killer of three people in Los Angeles, U.S., said yesterday that the defendant's lawyers had included irrelevant material in their rebuttal.

In the third session of the trial in the Central Jakarta District Court which was held in two phases, J Kamaru, who leads the team of prosecutors, in a 13-page reply to the rebuttal said that part of the rebuttal was substantial case material and evidence.

In its rebuttal on July 4, Oki's team of lawyers stated that the Central Jakarta District Court does not have the authority to prosecute the defendant because the crime took place beyond its jurisdiction, and that the indictment was inaccurate, unclear and incomplete as to have raised doubts.

Oki is being tried in Jakarta for allegedly killing Suresh Gobind Mirchandani on Aug. 19, 1991, Gina Sutan Aswar on Nov. 20, and Eko Tri Dewantono in Los Angeles.

In the first court session, J Kamaru when replying to the defendant's rebuttal concerning the prosecutors' authority, cited Article 156 of the Criminal Code Procedure which states that a defendant or defendant's lawyer has the right to demand that a case be dismissed if they can prove the court does not have the authority to proceed with the case, or that the indictment is unacceptable.

Kamaru referred to Article 5(1) of the Criminal Code and Article 86 of the Criminal Code Procedure to affirm the prosecutors' authority to process the case.

He denied there was any inaccuracy, vagueness or incompleteness in the indictment.

"The indictment includes the dates, months and years of the crime with a sentence 'from the year 1991 to the year 1992 in Los Angeles'," he said.

Henry Yosodininggrat, who leads the defendant's team of lawyers, said that the claim of "premeditated murder of Suresh Gobind Mirchandani" in the indictment contained insufficient information because the prosecutors did not mention the months Suresh failed to pay Oki his monthly payments for the business Oki sold him.

According to Henry, it is important that the months be mentioned as it related to the prosecutor's accusation that the defendant had been enraged and offended by Suresh which led the defendant to murder Suresh.

He also said that not enough evidence had been given by the prosecutors, such as the red Audi car in which the defendant had allegedly killed Suresh. As evidence, the blood stains in the red Audi car are important to indicate precisely where Suresh sat when he was allegedly shot by the defendant.

The defendant's team of lawyers claimed the indictment against Oki was based on imagination.

The presiding judge, IGK Sukarata, adjourned the case until July 23. (26)