Tag Archives: corruption

The Indictment of Haris Azhar and Fatia Maulidiyanti Denounces the Right to Freedom of Expression and Opinion

Posted on by
Reply

A Statement by the Asian Human Rights Commission

INDONESIA: The Indictment of Haris Azhar and Fatia Maulidiyanti Denounces the Right to Freedom of Expression and Opinion

The trial process of Ms. Fatia Maulidiyanti, a Coordinator of the Commission for Disappearances and Victims of Violence / KontraS 2020-2023 and Mr. Haris Azhar,the Founder of the Lokataru Foundation, finally entered the stage of reading the prosecution by the Public Prosecutor (Jaksa Penuntut Umum/JPU). However, before the Prosecutor submitted the prosecution, the legal team of Fatia and Haris also submitted documentary evidence which we had presented previously in the process of examining witnesses and experts. This documentary evidence aims to strengthen the evidence that Fatia and Haris are innocent and must be declared free from all charges.

In the opening of the prosecution letter, the Prosecutor was very tendentious in stating to stop using human rights (National Commission on Human Rights/Komnas HAM), anti-corruption and environmental issues in the Papua as an excuse to escape from criminal responsibility. Apart from that, we also highlighted the Prosecutor’s narrative that attacks the way that the legal counsel and the audience are perceived as making a fuss. This is very problematic because the Prosecutor does not just drop it. It however undermined the sense of solidarity that had built up in them between civil society groups.

The Prosecutor also created an issue of the witness and expert evidence session because they thought that it was not objective and not based on the oath. These allegations are serious, as well as dubious. The capacity of the witnesses and experts that we present, this also is an allegation that the witnesses’ statements and the experts that we present are manipulative and that they lie. In fact, the attitude of the witnesses and experts those we have presented so far have been very cooperative and they answered all the questions. The questions that were not answered were responses from our witnesses and experts to stupid and unnecessary questions asked by the Prosecutor.

In our opinion, the prosecution letter presented by the Prosecutor is dismissive of the evidentiary process at the trial. The Prosecutor did not mention the issue at all about the freedom of expression, the conflicts of interest of the officials and the anti-Strategic Lawsuit Against Public Participation (SLAPP) narrative that has been submitted during the evidentiary process at the trial. The Prosecutor also ignored the facts of the podcast based on research in the form of a rapid study of the civil society.

The prosecution letter increasingly emphasised that the Prosecutor is really defending Mr. Luhut’s interests, and not the public’s interests. The Prosecutor said that Mr. Luhut is not involved in mining practices in Papua at all. Whereas, in the process of proving the witness presented by the Prosecutor himself, namely Mr. Paulus Prananto admitted that the company owned by Luhut had explored business deals mining in Intan Jaya with West Wits Mining and PT Qurrota Madinah Ain.

As human rights defenders, the Prosecutor stated in the prosecution letter that labelling a human rights defender is not a justification for the actions taken by Fatia and Haris. The Prosecutor actually directed that Mr. Luhut’s rights, dignity and good name are the ones violated by Mr. Haris and Ms. Fatia. This paradigm is again wrong, because of the criticism that it conveys on these two human rights defenders in Luhut’s capacity as a public official, not an individual. The Prosecutor’s argument about insulting public officials once again confirms his bias of the Prosecutor in prosecuting this case. As stated in the joint decree, the Minister of Communication and Information, the Attorney General and the National Police Chief stated that the victim was the reporter who is an individual with a specific identity and not a profession, institution, corporation and position.

Furthermore, in the prosecution letter, the Public Prosecutor also raised an argument about the boundaries between criticism and humiliation. In the letter, the Prosecutor quoted several experts, who stated that criticism should be delivered politely and constructively. The legal team does believe that what Fatia and Haris did was purely guaranteed public criticism and not insulting in a democratic country.

We consider the contents of the indictment to be more about ‘Luhut’, because on several occasions it mentions Luhut’s offended feelings, tarnished good name and inner attitude. This is very excessive if you look at Luhut’s track record as a former military general who had a decades-long career in military institutions. Things what the Prosecutor read regarding Luhut’s feelings were exaggerated and seemed eager to ensnare Fatia and Haris based on the victims’ feelings and interests.

The Executive Director of the Asian Human Rights Commission, Prakash Mohara stated: “The case again extends the series of measures to silence critical voices of the civil society. Apart from that, the Prosecutor seems to want to convey the message that anyone who is critical against officials must be prosecuted before the courts. Furthermore, there is a very strong message, namely spreading fear  and not to try to excuse it from the freedom of expression and human rights. Finally, this trial process once again proves that the Prosecutor is a tool of power to silence those who are different and shows the increasingly strong phenomenon of democratic regression.”

The indictment is far-fetched, because there are many facts and arguments that have been compiled in an arbitrary manner, haphazardly. For example, the Prosecutor stated that Fatia was actively involved in the preparation of content and this is evident from the act of compiling notes containing the names of those to be mentioned at the time before the podcast was conducted. This proposition is of course not true because in fact, when the video was recorded, Fatia only brought nine quick studies of the civil society.

Based on the indictment read by the Public Prosecutor, Haris’ actions were essentially declared to have fulfilled the criminal elements as stipulated under Article 27 Paragraph (3) and Article 45 Paragraph (3) of the Electronic Information and Transaction Law (EITE Law) as well as Article 55 (2) (1) of the Criminal Code. 

The Prosecutor prosecuted Mr. Haris for four years and a fine of 1 million Rupiah, subsidiary to 6 months confinement. Apart from that, the Prosecutor also requested that Haris Azhar’s YouTube link be removed from the Internet Network. Meanwhile, Fatia was found guilty of violating Article 1. Same with Haris. The charges requested by the Prosecutor against Fatia are three term years and six months.

# # #

The Asian Human Rights Commission (AHRC) works towards the radical rethinking and fundamental redesigning of justice institutions in order to protect and promote human rights in Asia. Established in 1984, the Hong Kong based organisation is a Laureate of the Right Livelihood Award, 2014. 

Setara, YLBHI urge disgraced chief justice to resign over ethical violations

Posted on by
Reply

CNN Indonesia – November 8, 2023

Jakarta — The Setara Institute for Peace and Democracy is urging Anwar Usman o resign from his position as a Constitutional Court (MK) judge after being proven to have committed a serious violation of the ethics code due to a conflict of interest in the court’s ruling on the minimum age limit for presidential and vice presidential candidates.

As has been reported, in the Constitutional Court Honorary Council

(MKMK) ruling, Usman was only removed as the Constitutional Court chief justice and prohibited from taking part in future hearings that could potentially give rise to a conflict of interest.

“The MKMK decision is a momentary opium and an antidote to address the public’s anger which was disappointed and angry with the 90/PUU-XXI/2023 decision [to change the minimum age limit], which has became a culmination of constitutional evil and the death of democracy in Indonesia”, read an official statement by Setara Institute management board chairperson Ismail Hasani on Wednesday November 8.

Hasani said that the public’s angry reaction to the Constitutional Court’s ruling on the minimum age for presidential candidates was not just over the issue of smoothing the way for President Joko “Jokowi”

Widodo eldest son Gibran Rakabuming Raka to step forward in the 2024 presidential elections. But also about how power can interfere in legal affairs and the country’s constitution.

“Democracy has transformed into vetocracy, where a very limited group of people and interest groups, have orchestrated the Constitutional Court to make it easier for Gibran Rakabuming Raka to participate in the presidential elections by blocking the will of democracy and the constitution”, said Hasani, who is also known as a lecturer in constitutional law at the Jakarta Syarif Hidayatullah State Islamic University (UIN).

Setara believes that the MKMK’s decision proved that the court’s earlier ruling regarding the requirement for a vice presidential candidate was not decided “for the sake of justice based on belief in the Almighty God”, as stated in the Constitutional Court’s ruling, but rather, continued Hasani, was made in the interests of cultivating power.

On this basis, Hasani said that they are of the opinion that Usman should resign from his position as a Constitutional Court judge. “The Setara Institute is urging Anwar Usman to resign from his position as a MK judge, so that it will no longer a burden on the court”, he said.

Separately, the Indonesian Legal Aid Foundation (YLBHI) and its 18 Legal Aid Foundation (LBH) offices across Indonesia said that the MKMK’s decision on Usman’s ethical code violations is still problematic and does irreparable damage to the principle of equality before the law.

“It hurts the sense of justice of citizens who have long been traumatised by the New Order government [of former president Suharto] where corruption, collusion and nepotism destroyed the basic pillars of national life, namely the rule of law, democracy and human rights. The MKMK’s misguided justice is repeating the same mistakes”, read a joint statement by the YLBHI and the LBH offices on Wednesday.

“We are disappointed with the MKMK panel’s decision because the decision is a compromises on the disgraceful actions of the chief justice of the Constitutional Court. The MKMK should have made a decision to dishonorably dismiss him. Aside from this, the MKMK made a mistake by allowing the earlier 90/PUU-XXI/2023 ruling to remain in force, which should have been declared invalid”, they added.

The YLBHI and its regional offices said that the MKMK decision that was read out on Tuesday November 7 appears to confirm the public’s doubts about the ad hoc panel led by Jimly Asshiddiqie.

“If you abide with the prevailing legal provisions under Article 41 c in conjunction with Article 47 of Constitutional Court Regulation Number

1/2023 on the Constitutional Court Honorary Council and are consistent with the legal facts proven by Anwar Usman’s serious violations, the entire MKMK panel of judges should have decided to dismiss Anwar Usman from his position as a MK judge and as MK chief justice, not just dismissing him as chief justice of the MK”, said the YLBHI.

Out of the three MKMK members, only Bintan R Saragih had a dissenting opinion that Anwar Usman should be dishonorably dismissed from the Constitutional Court all together.

Furthermore, the YLBHI and its regional offices believe that Usman’s presence will become a burden and a time bomb for the Constitutional Court related to the issue of its integrity, independence and impartiality as a the guardian of democracy and the constitution.

“Therefore, YLBHI and the 18 LBH offices urge Anwar Usman as the perpetrator of nepotism to be self-aware and immediately resign as a Constitutional Court judge because he is no longer fit to hold that position”, they said.

Earlier, the MKMK decided that Usman was proven to have committed a serious ethical violation related to a conflict of interest in the Constitutional Court’s ruling that granted an appeal on the minimum age requirement for vice presidential candidates.

The MKMK also removed Usman from his position as chief justice and prohibited from nominating himself or being nominated as the head of the Constitutional Court until his term as constitutional judge ends.

Responding to demands that he resign from the Constitutional Court, Usman said he has consistently stated that the position belongs to God, as he did when questioned by the MKMK. Therefore he claimed that he will continue to participate in and carry out his activities as a constitutional judge.

“Yes, yes, [I will still carry out my duties as a member of the MK judges], this position belongs to Allah”, said Usman at the Constitutional Court building in Jakarta on Wednesday.

Then at today’s press conference, Usman denied all of the accusations that he was involved in a conflict of interest in ruling on the requirements for running as a presidential and vice presidential candidate. (dis/kid)

[Translated by James Balowski. The original title of the article was “SETARA Desak Anwar Usman Mundur dari MK Usai Langgar Etik Berat”.]

Source:

Former Governor of Papua Hears Judge’s Sentence to 8 Years in a Wheelchair

Posted on by
Reply

Sentenced the defendant Lukas Enembe to prison for eight years and a fine of Rp. 500 million with the provision that if the fine was not paid, it would be replaced by imprisonment for four months.

News Desk – Lukas Enembe

October 19, 2023

Jakarta, Jubi TV– Former Governor of Papua Lukas Enembe was sentenced to eight years in prison and a fine of IDR 500 million, subsidiary to four months in lieu of imprisonment by a panel of judges at the Corruption Crime Court at the Central Jakarta District Court in a bribery and gratification case. Lukas Enembe sat in a wheelchair in front of the panel of judges.

“Sentenced the defendant Lukas Enembe to imprisonment for eight years and a fine of Rp. 500 million with the provision that if the fine is not paid, it will be replaced by imprisonment for four months,” said Chief Judge Rianto Adam Pontoh reading the verdict at the Corruption Court. Jakarta, reported by Antara Thursday 19/10/2023.

Lukas Enembe was also sentenced to pay compensation in the amount of IDR 19,690,793,900 within one month after the decision becomes final or final.

“If they don’t pay, their property will be confiscated and auctioned by the prosecutor to cover the replacement money. “With the provisions, if the convict does not have sufficient assets, he will be punished with imprisonment for two years,” continued Rianto.

Apart from that, Lukas Enembe was also sentenced to an additional crime in the form of revocation of his right to be elected to public office for five years after he had finished serving his main sentence.

“Declaring that the defendant Lukas Enembe mentioned above has been legally and convincingly proven according to the law to be guilty of jointly committing criminal acts of corruption and gratification, as in the first and second indictment of the public prosecutor,” said Rianto.

Thus, Lukas Enembe was legally and convincingly proven to have violated Article 12 letter a of Law Number 31 of 1999 concerning the Eradication of Corruption Crimes Jo. Article 55 paragraph (1) 1st Criminal Code Jo. Article 65 paragraph (1) of the Criminal Code and Article 12 B of Law Number 31 of 1999 concerning the Eradication of Corruption Crimes.

“Stipulating that the period of arrest and detention served by the defendant be deducted entirely from the sentence imposed; determined that the defendant remains in detention,” added Rianto.

The judge’s sentence was lighter than the demands of the Public Prosecutor (JPU) of the Corruption Eradication Commission (KPK).

Previously, Lukas Enembe was sentenced to 10 years and six months in prison, as well as a fine of IDR 1 billion, a subsidiary of 6 months’ substitute imprisonment. He was also sentenced to additional criminal charges in the form of payment of compensation amounting to IDR 47,833,485,350.00.

In this case, the KPK prosecutor charged Lukas Enembe with two charges.

Firstly, Lukas was charged with receiving a bribe of IDR 45,843,485,350 with details amounting to IDR 10,413,929,500 from the Piton Enumbi Entrepreneur as Director and Owner of PT Melonesia Mulia, PT Lingge-Lingge, PT Astrad Jaya and PT Melonesia Cahaya Timur, and amounting to IDR 35,429,555 ,850 came from Rijatono Lakka as Director of PT Tabi Anugerah Pharmindo, PT Tabi Bangun Papua as well as CV Walibhu.

Second, Lukas Enembe was charged with receiving gratification in the form of IDR 1 billion from Budy Sultan as Director of PT Indo Papua on April 12 2013. (*)

———————————