Will legal system bury Tommy's case?

Will legal system bury Tommy's case?

Tiarma Siboro, The Jakarta Post, Jakarta

Noted lawyer Todung says only repressive methods could force
high-profile fugitive Hutomo "Tommy" Mandala Putra out of hiding.

"The only thing that would bring Tommy out of hiding and serve
his prison sentence would be the use of repressive measures by
the police," Todung told The Jakarta Post in a recent interview.

However, he said, he was pessimistic about whether the police
had any intention of finding Tommy.

Tommy's name surfaced again in the trial of former State
Logistics Agency (Bulog) chief Beddu Amang earlier this week.
Beddu, 65, was found guilty of corruption in a land swap deal by
the South Jakarta District Court on Monday and was sentenced to
two years imprisonment.

Tommy, the youngest son of former president Soeharto, and his
business associate Ricardo Gelael were each sentenced in
September 2000 to 18 months in prison for their involvement in a
land swap deal with Bulog that incurred Rp 95.4 billion (then
US$11.2 million) in losses to the state coffers.

The court's verdict on Beddu put the deal at Rp 20 billion
($20.8 million) way below the prosecutor's figure of Rp 95.4
billion.

Ricardo had served his sentence and was released from prison
in August this year but Tommy disappeared in November 2000. In an
intriguing twist of events, the Supreme Court overturned the
court's ruling last month and asked Tommy to report to the South
Jakarta Prosecutor's Office to sign his acquittal documents. He
remains at large.

When asked to comment, Todung said: "It just does not make any
sense that someone who is at large would appear before the office
only to sign the notification."

Todung said that repressive methods on the part of the police
could be used as a last resort to bring Tommy out of hiding.

"From the very beginning, Tommy has disregarded his legal
obligations. He decided to flee when former president Abdurrahman
Wahid rejected his plea for a pardon and he continues to stay in
hiding even after the Supreme Court acquitted him of all
charges," Todung said.

The Supreme Court's controversial ruling seemed more
pronounced following this week's verdict which implicated Tommy.

Asked to comment on Beddu's verdict, Todung who is also
chairman of Judicial Watch said: "I am not surprised by it."

The court findings revealed that Beddu initially signed a
Memorandum of Understanding with PT Sekar Artha Sentosa on Feb.
17, 1995.

However, on Aug. 11 of the same year, another MoU for the same
deal was made with PT Goro Batara Sakti. Tommy was then the owner
of both companies.

Tommy's escape constitutes one of the most absurd legal cases
in the country, loaded with rumors of bribery involving state
prosecutors and judges.

A possible stumbling block to Tommy's emergence from hiding
was the allegation that he had masterminded the assassination of
justice Syafiuddin Kartasasmita. The justice, who was shot dead
in his car on his way to work in July this year, was head of the
panel of judges in the court that found Tommy guilty.

A flamboyant billionaire, Tommy has also been accused of being
behind a spate of bombings in Jakarta, even though through his
relatives and lawyers Tommy has denied the accusations.

Separately, Achmad Ali, former expert advisor to the late
Baharuddin Lopa, the former attorney general, said the Supreme
Court should have the courage to declare that its verdict was
unlawful as it violated Criminal Code Procedures as well as the
Court's rules and procedures.

"The Criminal Code Procedures stipulate that an application
for a review must be made by the defendant himself or his heirs
and successors, and not his lawyers as in Tommy's case.

"The justices must also issue the verdict before the defendant
and the prosecutor," Achmad said.

He added that the court's procedures also underscored the
requirement that the verdict must not be issued in the absence of
the defendant.

Achmad questioned the Supreme Court's reasons for issuing its
ruling just prior to the issuance of the verdict on Beddu's case.

"What made Taufiq, along with other justices on the review
team, issue a verdict immediately although Tommy was not in
prison?," Achmad said referring to Supreme Court deputy chief M.
Taufiq.

The Court is allowed to immediately issue a verdict only if a
defendant is serving his prison term, he said.

Achmad shared Todung's pessimism saying: "The Supreme Court
has lost the courage to heed the people's sense of justice."