Long Distance Testimony

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.

Antasari's Testimony

Since the Police arrested Antazari Azhar for alleged murder of director of state own company Nazarudin Zulkarnaen, his position as Chairman of Commission for Eradication of Corruption (KPK) was suspended, and KPK's power as the most powerful Anti Corruption fighter in Indonesia began to fade away.

KPK became weaker after Antasari gave the Police a Testimony alleging KPK's other leaders of receiving bribes from PT. Masaro Radiokom which was investigated by KPK for corruption cases at the Department of Forestry and bribe of a member of Parliament (DPR).
In last night's interview with MetroTV, Antasari's lawyer Denny Kailimang said that the Testimony was written based on a recorded conversation between Antasari and the owner of PT. Masaro Radiokom Anggoro Wijaya in Singapore on October 2008.
After Antasari returned to Jakarta, his secretary downloaded the recording into Antasari's laptop, which was confiscated by the Police during a raid to the KPK office recently.

In reaction to the Testimony, KPK's Vice Chief Bibit Santoso doubted its content and said that the testimony defamed KPK.
While Vice Chairman of Transparency International Indonesia Soraya Aiman said that Antasari's meeting with Anggoro violated KPK Law No. 30/2002 which forbid its leaders from interacting directly with anyone suspected by KPK. Soraya further said that what has been quoted in the Testimony cannot be regarded a Witness Statement in Court because according to the Penal Code Art. 185 (1) a Witness Statement should be made in Court.

For details on the above, please click here , here,here, and here.

Considering the above mentioned facts, I hope that the Police investigation of the Nasrudin Murder case would finalized soon, so that the Prosecutor can bring it to the court for trial, that way the truth about Antasari's involvement can be revealed.