Prosecutor says former bank directors guilty of transfer

JAKARTA (JP): A prosecutor said in a preliminary hearing on Wednesday that the four former executives of Bank Bali were guilty of authorizing the transfer of a cessie contract.

The contract, totaling Rp 798,091,770,000, was transferred to private firm PT Era Giat Prima (EGP), although the Indonesian Bank Restructuring Agency (IBRA) later annulled the contract.

Prosecutor Andi Rahman Absar said the cancellation of the contract would not mean that the four defendants would be free from wrongdoing.

"The four former Bank Bali executives were guilty of authorizing the transfer," said Andi in a hearing of the high- profile scandal at the South Jakarta District Court.

"The four defendants failed to immediately register or report the transaction, which was carried out in stages from Jan. 11 to June 10 this year," he said.

The defendants' lawyer, L.L.M. Samosir, told the hearing last week that IBRA's move would mean that the transaction should be considered as if it never happened.

Era Giat Prima received Rp 546 billion of the Rp 798 billion in return for its assistance to recoup interbank loans on a closed down bank.

The bank restructuring agency annulled the contract on Oct. 15.

Four former executives of the bank -- former president director Rudy Ramli, his two former deputies, Firman Soetjadja and Henri Kurniawan, and former bank director Rusli Suryadi -- attended the hearing on Wednesday, which was presided over by Judge Soedarto.

Only a few bank employees came to support their former bosses in comparison to the dozens who packed the courtroom at the previous hearing.

Prosecutor Andi said the defendants' lawyers hastily concluded that the prosecutors failed to apply the correct article to prosecute the defendants.

"To examine the allegations of whether the defendants committed wrongdoing or not, we should wait until the judge orders an inquiry into the substance," Andi said.

According to procedure, the inquiry into the substance of a case is carried out after the judges issue a ruling that the case can continue. The court will decide further sessions whether it has the authority to try the case.

In the indictment, the prosecutors accuse the defendants of violating Article 49 of the 1998 Law on Banking, which defines a defendant as purposely omitting or neglecting to book a transaction.

Samosir argued last week that the prosecutors quoted an article which was invoked to address banking crimes, not for mistakes made in recording transactions.

Judge Soedarto adjourned the hearing until Dec. 1, when the court will decide whether it has the authority to continue the hearing or to terminate the case.(asa)