Tommy's lawyers blasted for avoiding trial

Muninggar Sri Saraswati, The Jakarta Post, Jakarta

All citizens are supposed to respect the court as an institution to uphold the law in the country. Consequently, whether they are a defendant, a witness, a prosecutor or a lawyer, they must obey its orders and regulations.

When a court summones somebody for a hearing, he or she is obliged to answer the summons. But on Wednesday, the lawyers of Hutomo "Tommy" Mandala Putra, the youngest son of former president Soeharto, were absent in their client's hearing.

They said that their action was in protest of the police detention of their colleague, Elza Syarief, for allegedly bribing two witnesses in Tommy's case.

The court was not able to hear the testimony of four witnesses because Tommy was not prepared to continue with the hearing without his lawyers, although the judges gave him the option to do so.

Last week, the court had summoned four witnesses to testify before the trial. Both prosecutors and lawyers had agreed to the schedule.

Presiding judge Amiruddin Zakaria adjourned the hearing for a week on the grounds that Article 54 of the Criminal Code Procedure stipulates that a suspect or a defendant has the right to be accompanied by his lawyers during questioning or a hearing.

In fact, the lawyers -- as is the case with a defendant, a witness, an expert or a prosecutor -- are only allowed to miss a court summons on good grounds, such as if they are sick, according to lawyers Luhut MP Pangaribuan and Frans Hendra Winata.

They both agreed that Tommy's lawyers' action had disrupted the legal process.

"Elza's detention has nothing to do with the hearing. There are no grounds to avoid the court summons," Luhut told The Jakarta Post on Friday.

Frans added that in the lawyers' code of ethics, the lawyers must put aside Elza's case as they have to focus their attention on their client.

Luhut noted that the court could actually try the lawyers for contempt of court as avoiding a court summons was considered a crime.

"There is no clear regulation on contempt of court, but in fact, a panel of judges could do so, if necessary," he said.

Contempt of court refers to any action reflecting disrespect for the court, such as yelling or doing something impolite in the courtroom, as well as disobeying the court summons.

If a panel of judges considers that someone has committed contempt of court, they could report it to the court chief. The chief would then ask for the accused's defense. If the accused is found guilty, the chief could report the crime to the police.

Unfortunately, courts here rarely report anyone to the police, let alone a lawyer, for contempt of court.

"If a lawyer keeps refusing to attend his client's hearing, a court here usually proceeds with the hearing despite their absence, which could harm the defendant's interests," Frans added.

The first contempt of court case involving lawyers occurred in 1987 at the Central Jakarta District Court.

At the time a panel of judges accused lawyer Adnan Buyung Nasution of insulting the court when he shouted with his hands on his hips during the hearing of HR Darsono, a former West Java provincial military commander, in a subversion case.

The Supreme Court and the Ministry of Justice later revoked his license to practice law.

But in Tommy's hearing, Judge Amiruddin could do nothing but grumble over the absence of the lawyers, while the judges had rushed to the Jakarta Fairground in Kemayoran, Central Jakarta to attend the hearing at 1:30 p.m.

Although he acceded to Tommy's request, Judge Amiruddin warned that the hearing would resume next week with or without his lawyers.