Former Employees of Ministry of Cooperatives and SMEs Samady Singarimbun being convicted of corruption cases filed in 2006 coal briquette judicial review of Act 8 of 1981 on the Law of Criminal Procedure (KUHAP) and Act 5 of 1991 on the Prosecutor of the Republic of Indonesia on Wednesday (15/5).
In the preliminary hearing, Petitioner was represented by Tonin Tachta Singarimbun, explaining their constitutional rights violated by the enactment of Article 1 paragraph 6 letter (a), Article 197 paragraph (1) item (k), paragraph (2) and paragraph (3), Section 270 Criminal Procedure Code and Article 27 paragraph (1) point (b) Attorney of the Republic of Indonesia. Petitioner argues that these articles be gap for Rangkasbitung State Attorney to file an appeal against the decision of Rangkasbitung District Court of free on him. According to Tonin, acquittal handed down by Rangkasbitung District Court does not conflict with the Supreme Court ruling letter that resulted in the decision null and void.
"Petitioner was acquitted by Rangkasbitung District Court graft coal briquettes worth 4.5 billion dollars, but Rangkasbitung State Attorney using these articles plunging back into custody," said Tonin before the panel of judges chaired by the Chief Justice M. Akil Mochtar.
Responding to the petition, the judges suggested improvements to the Applicant. Judge Hamdan Zoelva reveal Court had decided Article 197 paragraph 1, point (k) does not have binding force and contrary to the 1945 Constitution. "In addition, the applicant requested that the petition Article 1 paragraph 6 letter (a) conditional declared unconstitutional. This article describes the definition of attorney, if any declared unconstitutional parole will not influence anything," explained Hamdan.
While Akil requested that the applicant sharpens arguments in the petition. According to Akil, chapter petitioned for nonspecific. Judge gives 14 days to the applicant to correct the petition. (Lulu Anjarsari / mh)
Wednesday, May 15, 2013 | 18:38 WIB 130