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."