Hendro Sismoyo as the Petitioner’s legal counsel after delivering the revision of petition for judicial review of the Criminal Law Procedures Code (KUHAP) on Tuesday (15/8) at the Plenary Hall of the Constitutional Court Building. Photo by PR/Ganie.

The advocates who reviewed the rules of appeal in the pretrial process as stated in Law No. 8 of 1981 on Criminal Law Procedures Code (KUHAP) revised the petition. The revision was delivered by Hendro Sismoyo, originally the Petitioner, who became the legal counsel, in a petition revision session which took place on Tuesday (15/8) at the Plenary Hall of the Constitutional Court.

In the revision, the petitioner was changed to Anthony Chandra Kartawiria. He is a former Director of PT Mobile 8 who became a suspect in the 2007-2009 period of PT Mobile 8 tax refund corruption case.

"In the last session, I was the petitioner and for today I serve as the legal counsel of Anthony Chandra Kartawiria," Hendro Sismoyo explained in the session led by Constitutional Justice Suhartoyo.

The petitioner filed a pretrial motion on his status through an application letter dated November 1, 2016 and registered as Case No. 140/Pid/Prap/2016/Pn.Jkt.Selatan. On the pretrial motion filed by the petitioner, through Decision Number 140/Pid/Prap/2016/Pn.Jkt.Sel dated November 29, 2016, the South Jakarta District Court “… has granted the petitioner’s pretrial motion and determined that the naming of the petitioner as suspect is invalid and unlawful," Hendro explained further while reading the revision of petition Number 42/PUU-XV/2017.

With regard to the decision, according to the petitioner, investigators will file a cassation or extraordinary legal measures in the form of a request for a review to the Supreme Court to reconsider the pretrial decision.

Furthermore, the petitioner did not change his application regarding the petition and argument of the petition. The petitioner considered that Article 83 Paragraph (1) of the KUHAP in the phrase "not appeal-able" formulated that the principle of presumption of innocence was a form of protection and recognition of human rights must also consider legal certainty. In line with the provision, he explained, the case which has been decided permanently by the judge (inkracht van gewijsde)—in this case, the pretrial decision—cannot be re-filed.

(Lulu Anjarsari/lul/Yuniar Widiastuti)