TAUD: Today an Acid Attack Is Repaid with Impunity
The Democracy Advocacy Team (TAUD) has condemned the appeal ruling of the Jakarta High Military Court in the case of the acid attack on Andrie Yunus, External Deputy Coordinator of the Commission for the Disappeared and Victims of Violence (KontraS).
They consider that the sentences handed down to the defendants have not delivered justice for Andrie as the victim.
“We declare that today an acid attack has been repaid with impunity, the defendants received light sentences, and the more than 16 other parties involved remain free,” said Fadhil Alfathan, a TAUD representative, at a press conference in front of the Supreme Court on Monday (7/9).
“For that reason, we, the Democracy Advocacy Team, condemn the appeal ruling of the Jakarta High Military Court, or DILMILTI II Jakarta, which then reduced the sentences of the four TNI soldiers who carried out the acid attack against Andrie Yunus,” Fadhil said.
According to the appeal verdict in case number 56-K/PMT-II/BDG/AL/VI/2026, the first defendant, Sergeant Edi Sudarko, was sentenced to 2 years and 6 months in prison. Meanwhile, the second defendant, First Lieutenant Budhi Hariyanto Widhi, was sentenced to 2 years in prison.
Under the ruling, the additional penalty of dismissal from the service imposed on Edi and Budhi was also revoked.
The third defendant, Captain Nandala Dwi Prasetyo, was sentenced to 2 years in prison, and the fourth defendant, First Lieutenant Sami Lakka, was sentenced to 1 year and 6 months in prison.
“And this ruling, which we accessed in DILMILTI II Jakarta decision number 56, in fact granted leniency to the perpetrators that does not deliver justice for the victim, strengthens the practice of impunity, and gives the impression that military personnel receive exclusive treatment before the law,” Fadhil explained.
In its appeal ruling, the panel of judges considered a number of factors in revoking the additional penalty of dismissal against Edi and Budhi, including the results of psychological examinations, the fact that neither was a repeat offender, their acknowledgement of the act, their family circumstances, and Andrie’s absence from the first-instance trial.
TAUD considers that the ruling also fails to address the alleged involvement of other parties in the attack on Andrie.
“We also declare that this ruling closes off a much bigger problem, above all relating to TAUD’s findings that more than 16 people are suspected of involvement in the series of attacks against Andrie Yunus and have yet to be processed legally,” said Fadhil.
“And from the outset, TAUD has handed over evidence and revealed the alleged involvement of parties who not only carried out the attack, but are also suspected of ordering, planning, funding, and standing behind it.”
The attack on Andrie took place on 12 March 2026. At the time, Andrie was pursuing a legal challenge to the Military Court Law and the TNI Law before the Constitutional Court.
TAUD believes the attack forms part of a pattern of assaults against human rights defenders and activists in Indonesia.
“Because we believe that this attack on Andrie Yunus was not a personally motivated act, but rather part of a pattern of attacks against human rights defenders and activists in Indonesia,” said Jane Rosalina.
“And we also wish to make clear that this case cannot stop at these four perpetrators. We demand that this case be thoroughly investigated up to the intellectual actors, up to those who funded it, and up to those who ordered it,” she said.
In its statement of position, TAUD also made three demands:
Discharge and prosecute the perpetrators, including the intellectual actors behind them.
Carry out a thorough evaluation of the Military Court system.
Ensure the state is present to provide protection and recovery for Andrie Yunus and his family.