---

Applicant Suud Rusli is accompanied with his attorney at preliminary session on Act of Clemency, on Wednesday (9/9), at Plenary Room, the Constitutional Court Building. Photo PR/Ganie

 

 

 

The Constitutional Court (Mahkamah Konstitusi –MK) holds preliminary session on Act Number 5 Year 2010 of Clemency (Undang-Undang Grasi –UU Grasi), on Wednesday (9/9), at Plenary Room, the Constitutional Court Building. Suud Rusdi as Applicant I presents at the session accompanied with his attorney and prison guards. He requests the Court to annul Article 7 (2) Act of Clemency regarding the time limit of clemency filing.

Applicant’s Attorney Kurniawan Adi Nugroho delivers petition points and requests the Court to declare Article 7 (2) Act of Clemency contrary to the 1945 Constitution.

Nugroho delivers the background case of petition. He explains that Applicant I is a death convict in Asabri case which occurred in 2003-2004 and the decision of his guilt has been granted permanent legal force in 2006-2007. He further says that his client has been hampered by the Article a quo, saying convicts could only file clemency within one year from the date of decision granted permanent legal force (inkracht).

Meanwhile, Applicant II Marselinus Edwin Hardian says he no longer could help convicts in filing clemency. As known, Hardian is a law student of Universitas Attahiriyah who also a legal aid activist.

Within his 12 year conviction, Applicant I considers he cannot file clemency due to the provision in Article a quo which provide one year time limit for clemency filing. He considers clemency filing period is much longer than one year. Moreover, he considers he entitled to second chance because he provides guidance to fellow prisoners actively.

“Basically, the Applicant requests death penalty cancellation. He requests sentence reduction; his death penalty is reduced into 15-20 years imprisonment, so he could devote himself to the community,” said Nugroho in front of Justice Panel led by Constitutional Justice Patrialis Akbar.   

Justices Input

After hearing Applicant’s explanation, Constitutional Justice Manahan MP Sitompul advises the Applicant to further elaborate Applicant’s constitutional loss. Manahan questions whether one year time limit for clemency filing is not enough. “Is one year time limit not enough? Is there any reason which cause the Applicant cannot file clemency within one year?” asked Manahan.

Meanwhile, Constitutional Justice Patrialis Akbar advises the Applicant to link the philosophical aspect of clemency with Applicant’s constitutional rights. He further says that the Applicant supposes to link the philosophical aspect of clemency with arguments explaining the Applicant has never granted the aspect of clemency or the aspect of Act of Clemency.

“You want to grant State’s privilege in form of clemency, right? You could try by comparing (Act of Clemency, ed.) with Act of Corrections. Act of Corrections saying correctional institutions could change convicts’ habit; make them regret their past criminal offenses. That is the task of correctional institutions. You could start your argument from that aspect and you could deliver the philosophical aspect of correctional institution if you have been improved your habit optimally. It will be better if you are able to show appreciations or achievements from correctional institution which given to you,” said Patrialis. He also reminds the Applicant to submit petition revision not later than September 22, 2015 at 10.00 am. (Yusti Nurul Agustin/IR/Prasetyo Adi N)

---