Pakpahan to file request for a trial review

Pakpahan to file request for a trial review

JAKARTA (JP): Labor leader Muchtar Pakpahan will file a
request for a trial review with the Supreme Court next week to
contest the court's recent ruling that sent him back to prison.

Alamsyah Hamdani, one of his lawyers in Medan, told The
Jakarta Post by phone yesterday they would file the request on
Monday or Tuesday.

Pakpahan, chairman of the unrecognized Indonesian Prosperous
Labor Union, was sentenced to three years in jail in November
1994 for inciting riots in Medan. The high court increased the
sentence to four years.

But he was later released from jail after a three-member panel
of Supreme Court justices led by Adi Andojo Soetjipto exonerated
him from all charges after finding there had been insufficient
evidence to punish Pakpahan.

Former chief justice Soerjono with colleagues Sarwata and
Radja Palti Siregar, however, overturned Andojo's decision last
October after they found mistakes in the implementation of the
law. Soerjono made the decision on Oct. 25, just five days before
he retired and was replaced by Sarwata.

Pakpahan, who refused to sign the ruling Monday, is detained
in Jakarta's Cipinang prison and facing subversion charges for
his alleged attempt to undermine the legitimate government.

Separately, Pakpahan's lawyer in Jakarta Luthfie M. Hakim told
the Post his client refused to sign the controversial ruling
because he intended to seek a trial review.

"We believe there was a mistake made by the panel of justices
who meted out last October's ruling," Luthfie said.

Many legal experts have said the trial review was
unprecedented, because Criminal Code Procedures stipulate that
only a defendant or his beneficiaries can request a trial review
from the Supreme Court.

Unfair

Meanwhile, a professor of law from the Semarang-based
Diponegoro University, Soehardjo S.S, said it would be just fine
if Pakpahan sought a trial review. But, he said he believed
there was nothing wrong with the Oct. 25 ruling.

According to Soehardjo, a former legislator from the ruling
Golkar party between 1982 and 1987, said that granting the
prosecutors' request for a trial review was not in violation of
Criminal Code Procedures.

The Medan prosecutors filed a review because they believed
Andojo's ruling was legally defective, he said, adding that
Pakpahan's exoneration was "unfair" because dozens of other
activists tried in the same case had been punished.

Separately, J.E. Sahetapy of the Surabaya-based Airlangga
University said if, for instance, three of five people tried for
the same crime were found guilty, then the remaining two should
also be guilty.

"The judge cannot rule a defendant guilty if evidence is
insufficient," said the professor of law.

Sahetapy said the Supreme Court's present leadership should
learn from the Pakpahan affair to put their house in order. (08)