Oki should not be prosecuted here: Lawyers

JAKARTA (JP): The lawyers of Harnoko Dewantono alias Oki who is on trial for a triple murder in Los Angles, U.S., said at the Central Jakarta District Court yesterday that it is beyond the jurisdiction of the Central Jakarta Prosecutor's Office to prosecute the defendant.

"It is certainly not that we want the defendant to be acquitted from the charges, but it is rather part of our responsibility to remind all of us to keep from misapplying the law," said one of the lawyers, Henry Yosodininggrat.

According to the indictment, Oki, 32, murdered his Indian business partner Suresh Gobind Mirchandani on Aug. 19, 1991, his Indonesian woman friend Gina Sutan Aswar on Nov. 2 1992, and his younger brother Ery Tri Harto Dharmawan.

The 14-page rebuttal titled Dakwaan Imajiner (Imaginary Indictment), read by lawyers Henry Yosodiningrat and Nurhasyim Ilyas, also stated that the dossier on Oki was inconcise, unclear and incomplete so as to have raised doubts about the indictment.

The team of nine lawyers said that according to Article 173 of Criminal Code, the Jakarta Provincial Prosecutor's Office and Central Jakarta Prosecutor's Office do not have the authority to process any crimes committed beyond their jurisdiction. The dossier on Oki thus violates Article 143 paragraph 2(b) of the Criminal Code. Article 143 paragraph 3 states that a dossier by the public prosecutor should be concise, clear and complete and must otherwise be rejected.

Henry said before the court presided over by IGK Sukarata that, beginning with Suresh's murder, the prosecutors had created a serial of murder stories resembling those of Agatha Christie's.

"We did not find any information from witnesses or experts, letters, clues or the defendant's explanation (as legitimate evidence required by Article 184 of the Criminal Code) that can be used as the material or basis to indict the defendant," Henry said.

"Without mentioning the months, the indictment is incomplete. Mentioning dates is very important if charging someone with premeditated murder, say for instance the purchase of the gun on May 1, 1991," Henry said.

The charges also claim Oki killed Suresh because he had failed to pay monthly installments for the dry cleaning service he bought from the defendant. The statements are also obscure as the prosecutors did not mention what months Suresh had defaulted on his payments, the lawyers said.

In response to the indictment of slaying Gina Sutan Aswar, Nurhasyim Ilyas, who read the rebuttal later, said that not enough evidence had been given by the prosecutors. "There's even no witnesses or other evidence that can be used against the defendant. Neither did the prosecutors state exactly when all the boxes used to keep the victim 's body were prepared and by whom," Nurhasyim said.

The indictment on slaying the defendant's own younger brother, according to Nurhasyim, is libelous and obscure. The place and time of the event are not specified clearly, he said. "This shows doubts, and it is harmful to the defendant's legal rights, especially when the defendant needs an alibi."

The trial was adjourned until July 16 to hear the prosecutors' reply to the rebuttal. (26)