The dilemma of the cases of Soeharto and Tommy

Three of Indonesia's former presidents are connected with legal cases. The cases of two of the former presidents are not so complex or dilemmatic. B.J. Habibie, apart from being questioned in relation to Buloggate II, is now being sought by the German district attorney, after a number of important documents related to a bribery case implicating former German chancellor, Helmut Kohl, were reported to be in Habibie's villa in the northern part of the country.

Abdurrahman Wahid was allegedly involved in the Rp 35 billion Yanatera Bulog case (Buloggate I). Although the legal outcome of this case has not been determined, the former chairman of Nahdlatul Ulama (NU) was nonetheless ousted from the presidency through the Special Session of the People's Consultative Assembly (MPR) in July 2001.

The legal case of former president Soeharto, however, is the most complex and poses the greatest dilemma. It is like the popular saying: "Forward or backward, whichever way you choose, you lose." Both the Attorney General's Office and the court to date have avoided taking further action.

The situation is further complicated by Soeharto's son, Hutomo "Tommy" Mandala Putra's case. It was made worse when the Supreme Court issued a legal opinion saying Tommy should go to jail to serve the amount of time he would have spent in prison, had he not fled, up until his exoneration.

The Supreme Court's legal opinion has not solved the problem, but on the contrary, has made the legalities more intricate and complicated.

What must be emphasized is the huge damage inflicted upon the nation and the people, in terms of the loss of money, time and energy, especially from the perspective of politics and public peace, all of which have been caused by the dilemmatic cases of Soeharto and Tommy.

Is this due to the wrongdoings of Soeharto and Tommy or is it due to the sick legal system along with its sick implementors?

-- Suara Pembaruan, Jakarta