IO, Jakarta – The Anti-Corruption Civil Community Coalition, comprised of the Indonesia Corruption Watch (ICW) and the Indonesian Legal Aid Foundation (Yayasan Lembaga Bantuan Hukum Indonesia – “YLBHI”) has reported two Supreme Court Justice to the Judicial Commission (Komisi Yudisial – “KY”). Supreme Court Justices Syamsul Rakan Chaniago and M. Askin, were reported for having thrown out the conviction of the defendant in the corruption case involving the issuance of a Full Repayment Certificate (Surat Keterangan Lunas – “SKL”) in the Bank Indonesia Liquidity Support (Bantuan Likuiditas Bank Indonesia – “BLBI”) scheme, Syafruddin Arsyad Temenggung.
The Supreme Court granted the Petition for Cessation submitted by the defendant in the BLBI Case Syafruddin Arsyad Temenggung. On this basis, the Supreme Court hereby declared that Defendant Syafruddin be absolved of all legal charges (ontslag van allerechtsvervolging). Furthermore, the rights of the defendant in terms of his capacity, position, dignity, and reputation should be restored.
“The Coalition hereby officially reports the two Supreme Court Justices who voided the conviction of the defendant Syafruddin Arsyad Temenggung, news which has become widespread recently. We consider that there have been considerations made by the Head of the Supreme Court’s PR Division when he read out the summary of the judgment,” said ICW Researcher Kurnia Ramadhana at KY’s Office in Jalan Kramat Raya, Central Jakarta.
Kurnia then elaborated on the reasons for the reporting of these Supreme Court Justices to the KY. First, there was dissenting opinion among the justices who considered the case to be a civil or administrative case, while in the judex facti and pre-hearing levels it was clearly stated that the case was a criminal case that caused a loss of Rp 4.58 trillion to the State. The Coalition considers that the step taken by the Corruption Eradication Commission (Komisi Pemberantasan Korupsi – “KPK”), i.e. to take the SKL BLBI Case to the Corruption Crime Court. Yet the Supreme Court ended up considering the case as a civil case instead of criminal case.
Second, the Supreme Court’s decision in the Syafruddin Cessation Case is misinformed. Kurnia finds it odd that Syafruddin, was declared guilty and sentenced to 13 years of imprisonment at first level court, amended to 15 years of imprisonment at appeal level, while the Supreme Court revoked all sentences when they declared that they consider the case to be a civil one.
“When there were dissenting opinions, the Chairman of the Panel did not take the initiative to add to the Panel, even though this is allowed during deadlock voting to make the count more just,” he said.
Third, the Coalition discovered that one of the Supreme Court Justices continues to run his legal firm, while according to Justice Authority Law no judge may double up as a lawyer.
Chairman of the KY Jaja Ahmad Jayus promised to follow up the report against the two Supreme Court Justices in relation to Syafruddin’s case. He stated that KY will issue a verdict at most 60 days after it received the Coalition’s report according to the Regulation of KY Number 2 of 2015. “No matter what the violation by any judge may be, they will be given light to heavy sanctions accordingly: a verbal warning, a written warning, suspension from court for up to 6 months, suspension from court for more than 6 months, or even dishonorable discharge,” he said.
Separately, KPK Spokesman Febri Diansyah stated that they are ready to assist the Judicial Commission in prosecuting these two Supreme Court Justices. KPK also disapproves of their decision to free Syafruddin. “If the Judicial Commission requires information support or any other relevant support from KPK, such as any necessary documents or evidence, the KPK is more than happy to help,” Febri stated at Gedung Merah Putih KPK, South Jakarta.
Until now, KPK has not received any copy of the full verdict relating to Syafruddin Temenggung’s Cessation Case from the Supreme Court. Febri hopes that the Supreme Court quickly sends the relevant documents to KPK, “In order for us to be able to take more concrete follow up action. We need to take immediate legal action relating to this verdict,” he said. (Dan)