Students to be freed but case continues

BOGOR (JP): Police are considering the release of three students suspected of killing a police officer, but insisted that their case would be brought to court, an officer said yesterday.

Bogor Regional Police chief Col. Abubakar Nataprawira said he would consider releasing the three Juanda University students from police custody.

The move, however, would not mean that the charges against them had been annulled, he said.

"We'll continue the case in court," Abubakar said after meeting with members of the National Commission on Human Rights, lawyers and representatives of the university.

The police decision did not satisfy fellow students and the university's rector.

After meeting with Abubakar, Juanda University rector Abadi Soetisna urged the police to unconditionally free his students.

"For the sake of the law and the nation, please release our students. We are 100 percent sure that they are not guilty," Abadi told reporters at the Bogor Police Headquarters.

Outside, hundreds of students staged a demonstration, demanding the release of their friends, Emon Wahyudi, Tb. Ade and Syaifullah.

They pledged to continue their rally until the three were released.

Charges

The three students could be charged under Article 170, Article 351 and Article 214 of the Criminal Code.

Article 170 on mobbing carries a maximum punishment of 12 years in jail, Article 351 on torture carries a maximum penalty of two years and eight months while Article 214 on fighting against security officers carries a maximum punishment of 15 years in jail.

Commission member Clementino dos Reis Amaral said the police would likely charge the students for mobbing since they had allegedly caused injuries stipulated under Article 170 (2.1).

"The police apparently decided not to charge the students with murder," Amaral said.

The police has accused the three students of being involved in the mobbing that led to the death of Second Lt. Dadang Rusmana, head of the Bogor police intelligence unit, during a May 9 student demonstration on the campus.

The accusations became controversial this week when forensic expert Yuli Budiningsih, who performed the autopsy of the officer's body, publicly disclosed that Dadang's death was caused by a heart attack.

Amaral said the commission would discuss all new findings, including the different explanations of death by police and forensic experts.

He urged the police to immediately release the students and bring the case to the court soon.

Torture

Amaral, who met the three students at the Bogor Police Precinct yesterday, also said that the students had been tortured while being detained.

In another related development, National Police spokesman Brig. Gen. Da'i Bachtiar expressed concern over Yuli's decision to disclose the postmortem results publicly before notifying the police.

"So the postmortem (result) should not be revealed to the public. It must be given to the police first for further investigation.

The investigation is done based on justice, and therefore, the postmortem result cannot be disclosed until it is used in the courtroom," Da'i said.

He said the postmortem was only one determining factor in running an investigation. Other aspects, such as witness and expert testimonies, hard evidence and defendant testimonies were needed to build a case, he said.

Yuli, a forensic expert at the Indonesian Red Cross (PMI) Hospital, said that there were no signs of torture on the body.

Abubakar, who is to be promoted to West Java deputy police chief, yesterday asked another forensic expert, Mun'im Idries of Cipto Mangunkusumo General Hospital, for a second opinion on the autopsy.

Mun'im said Yuli's public announcement over the autopsy result was unethical.

"The result is a legal matter. The autopsy was ordered by the police and should be submitted to the police. It depends on the police on how to use the result," Mun'im said.

The autopsy result could be examined by another forensic expert who could have a different opinion, he said.

He reminded that an autopsy result contained two things: facts and opinion.

He said the facts produced a conclusion which was a matter of opinion. "It's the conclusion that will become evidence in court." (24/edt/jun)