Pakpahan ruling disappoints rights activists
SEMARANG (JP): Two National Commission on Human Rights members have questioned the legal grounds in the Supreme Court's recent decision to put labor leader Muchtar Pakpahan back in prison after it acquitted him of all charges two years ago.
Satjipto Rahardjo and Muladi said the Criminal Code Procedure states prosecutors could not appeal against a Supreme Court decision to unconditionally acquit a suspect.
Former chief justice Soerjono, only five days before he retired on Nov. 1, sent Muchtar Pakpahan back to prison for instigating labor unrest in Medan, North Sumatra, in April 1994.
The ruling was made following a request by North Sumatra provincial prosecutors' office that the court review the acquittal signed by Deputy Chief Justice Adi Andojo Soetjipto in Sept. 1995 for lack of evidence.
Controversies have so far arisen over whether a prosecutor has the legal right to request for a review of the Supreme Court's rulings. The Criminal Code does not have provisions on the matter.
In separate interviews with The Jakarta Post over the weekend, Muladi and Satjipto argued the Criminal Code rules that the right to appeal with the Supreme Court rested with the person standing trial or his or her relatives, not the prosecutors.
"The court's decision favoring the prosecutors contains a lot of oddities," said Satjipto Rahardjo, who is also a legal expert at Semarang's Diponegoro University.
Satjipto said a case the Supreme Court annuls should need no further review.
Pakpahan, head of the unrecognized Prosperous Labor Union (SBSI) was sentenced to three years in jail in November 1994 for inciting riots in Medan, North Sumatra. The high court increased his sentence to four years.
Pakpahan was released after a three-member panel of Supreme Court justices led by Deputy Chief Justice Adi Andojo Soetjipto exonerated him of all charges.
Former chief justice Soerjono, with colleagues Raja Palti Siregar and chief justice Sarwata, however, annulled Andojo's decision on the grounds that there were mistakes in the law's implementation.
There has been rife speculation that Soerjono's controversial decision was because of his sour relationship with Adi Andojo who has publicly exposed Supreme Court corruption.
Meanwhile, Pakpahan has been in trouble again. He has been detained by the Attorney General Office on subversion charges over the July 27 riot in Jakarta. The authorities have never specified his role in the riot.
Satjipto said the oddities were made by Soerjono's team of justices rather than by the system.
He warned the latest controversial ruling would become a precedent for prosecutors to demand a Supreme Court review for suspects unconditionally acquitted.
"If the Supreme Court continues making conflicting rulings, people will eventually lose respect for it. Justices should be careful because their credibility is at stake," he said.
Muladi, who is also rector of the Diponegoro University, said the latest legal controversy and the Supreme Court's previous questionable verdicts should prompt the state to review its legal system. (har/06)