The trial of Abubakar Ba'asyir at the District Court of South Jakarta last week was filled with harsh protests by Ba'asyir as the Defendant and his team of lawyers.
One of the things they protested was the Council of Judges's decision to allow the Witnesses to testify without appearing physically in Court but through teleconference.
In this regards I would like to share what blogger-lawyer Anggara has wrote on his blog: http://anggara.org.
Anggara quoted Hukumonline as saying that the use teleconference in the trial violate the Criminal Prosedural Law (KUHAP) which stipulated that Witnesses must testify by appearing pshycally in Court.
The KUHAP may not mention about the possibility of using Teleconference in Court Trial, but there is the Witness and Victim Law No. 13/2006 with enable the Hearing of Witness to be carried out through teleconference.
And in this case, the Prosecutors have stated that the purpose of witness hearing through teleconference is to safeguard the safety of the Witness.
The said Law does not specifically rule that the teleconference witness hearing can be done on condition that the witness is under protection, but for the sake of fair trial it would better if the council of judges ask the Prosecutor to explain why must the hear be done through teleconference, and allow the defendant and his lawyers to raise their objection.
Although in the end the judges would decide to allow the teleconference, but the defendant and his lawyers would not be protesting very harshly because they have already been given the chance to raise objection.