Applicant’s Attorney Haitami after attended the petition revision session on Act of Criminal Procedure, on Monday (16/02) at Plenary Room, the Constitutional Court Building. Photo PR/Ganie

Petition revision session on Act Number 8 Year 1981 of Criminal Procedure (Undang-Undang Kitab Undang-undang Hukum Acara Pidana –UU KUHAP) –Case Number 18/PUU-XIII/2015– was filed by the Constitutional Court (Mahkamah Konstitusi –MK) on Monday afternoon (16/2). The Applicant was Emus Mustarman bin Harja who reviewed Article 27, Article 263 (1), and Article 270 Act a quo.

 “Well, today is petition revision agenda. The Applicant revision had received by the Court through Court’s Registrar. Please deliver the outline of petition revision,” said Head Panel Patrialis Akbar.

“Petition revision as previously ordered by Your Honor. Main revision is we still file (the petition, red) towards the implementation of the Criminal Procedure on Article 27, Article 263 (1), and Article 270 Act of the Criminal Procedure. Thank you,” said Applicant’s Attorney Haitami.  

“Court’s Registrar had received the evidence you filed, which are P-1 evidence to P-7 evidence. We will first validate the evidences,” said Patrialis.

As known, the Applicant was a convict detained in the Cianjur Correctional Institution Class II-B (Lembaga Permasyarakatan  Kelas II-B Cianjur). The Applicant made an appeal against his case and its decision had adjudicated on the ruling of cessation decision excerpt Number 519-K/Pid.Sus/2014 dated May 07, 2014 which mainly stated “The Supreme Court of the Republic of Indonesia on cessation level rejects the appeal of defendant Emus Mustarman bin Harja and criminalize him with imprisonment for 4 years and criminal fine of Rp. 200 millions and pay compensation as much as Rp. 118 millions.”   

After the appeal rejected, the Applicant filed a petition of reconsideration towards the cessation decision a quoto the Supreme Court through Registrar Head of Bandung District Court Class 1A Special Case/Corruption (Ketua cq Panitera PN Kelas 1A Khusus/Tipikor Bandung) and answered through letter Number W.11UI/3433/HN.02.02/IX/2014 which basically declared Bandung District Court Class 1A Special Case/Corruption was yet accepted the petition because entire appeal case files were yet sent by the Supreme Court to the District Court.

Concerning on the rejection, the Applicant filed pretrial petition on the basis of illegal arrest and detention. However, the pretrial petition was rejected by the Cianjur Correctional Institution Class II-B. Further, the Applicant filed same petition to the Bandung District Court Class 1A Special Case/Corruption and it was again rejected. (Nano Tresna Arfana/Prasetyo Adi N)