Tommy-related cases: When A becomes B

Tommy-related cases: When A becomes B

Muninggar Sri Saraswati, The Jakarta Post, Jakarta

Many people tell lies. They may lie to their boss, spouse,
neighbors, and even to the police, or judges.

During police investigation, a suspect may say 'A', but then,
when he or she is brought to court, he or she may say 'B' instead
of 'A'.

Defendants commonly withdraw their statements made before the
police, claiming that they were coerced into making certain
statements.

That has also been the case with several defendants related to
Hutomo "Tommy" Mandala Putra.

Take Elize Maria Tuwahatu, for example. Elize was Tommy's
accomplice who was sentenced to 10 years in prison last year for
the illegal possession of bombs. During the police investigation,
she admitted that she had received the bombs from Tommy. The
statement was made in the presence of a lawyer.

But when she was tried at the East Jakarta District Court, she
withdrew her statement, saying that she made the statement under
police coercion.

Hetty Siti Hartika, the manager of Cemara Apartments which
belongs to the Soeharto family, also withdrew her statement in
the police dossier that implicated Tommy in the same case.

R. Maulawarman alias Molla and Noval Hadad, Tommy's bodyguards
who are currently on trial for the murder of Supreme Court
Justice M. Syafiuddin Kartasasmita, also withdrew their
statements.

All of them retracted their statements related to Tommy, even
though the statements had been made in the presence of their
lawyer.

And all of that is allowed under Indonesian law.

In the courtroom, a defendant may lie in order to defend
himself because he is not under oath.

Chairman of the Indonesian Legal Aid and Human Rights
Association (PBHI) Hendardi said defendants, guided by their
lawyers, may try to confuse law enforcers by giving inconsistent
statements.

In the end, it all depends on the judges whether they accept
the "lies" or not.

"It depends on the judges, whether they allow the defendant to
fool them or not. They should be alert to the tricks of the
defendant and the lawyer," he said.

He noted that it is a common practice for the police to use
pressure during the investigation.

In order to avoid such things, Article 56 paragraph 1 of the
Criminal Procedures Code stipulates that a suspect or a defendant
facing a charge that carries a minimum penalty of five years
imprisonment must be accompanied by a lawyer during questioning.

The law also stipulates that the investigator must inform a
suspect of his right to have a lawyer present during questioning.

But verdicts often do not reflect the people's wishes because
of behind-the-scenes games by courtroom players.