info_kontras
  |
Press Release
   
 
[ dilihat 128 kali ]

MUNIR Case: Muchdi PR should be indicted

In court session in January 15, there was a substantial legal fact revealed; Pollycarpus and  Muchdi PR, while he was Deputy V BIN,  knew each other. This crucial fact came out from Budi Santoso’s dossier (papers filed to the court by prosecutors containing statement under oath before the prosecutor, known Berita Acara Pemeriksaan, BAP) read before the court. Santoso, a middle ranked BIN agent since 2006, and a director 5.1 of Supporting Unit of Directorat V, was then a military.

In the earlier sessions, Polly and Muchdi consistently denounced the fact that they had acquainted each other. And even now, Polly stands still. At this time, Muchdi has not been called yet to appear before the court. This is that Komite Aksi Solidaritas untuk Munir (KASUM) upsets about.

Budi Santoso’s dossier confirmed the other fact revealed in earlier session that they had made sequence phone call either from their cellular phones or from Polly’s fix line phone to Muchdi’s office phone number.   

KASUM, at the very beginning, insisted prosecutor to bring Budi Santoso to testify before the court so that judges, defendant (Indra Setiawan’s attorney), and prosecutor may cross examine him. No doubt that the cross examination can provide more substantive facts beyond the dossier made before the prosecutor.

Even so, KASUM appreciated prosecutor that read the Santoso’s under oath statement. This move was allowed by the Law number 8/1981 of Court Proceeding Article 162 paragraph 2 stated that “when under oath statement is given, it has the same value with witness statement given before the court.”

Based on Santoso’s dossier, KASUM urge Police as a prosecutor to indict Muchdi PR. In order to prevent him commit or attempt to commit other crime, KASUM call the Police to place him under arrest. This move may be grounded on Law number 8/1981 Article 106. The article said a prosecutor may take necessary inquiries.

In fact, indicting Muchdi PR, a former Deputy V BIN could have been done at the very beginning without basing it on Santoso’s under oath statement. This was because prosecutor had known the fact about Muchdi’s role in the conspiracy of Munir killing while conducting examination over Santoso.

Indicting him is an important move to uncover other actors involved in the conspiracy of murder. This can disclose not only the main actor but also uncover anyone who is indirectly responsible and has interest of the murder.

Despite indicting Muchdi, Santoso’s under oath statement read before the court can be served as a basis for the prosecutor to initiate investigation over Hendropriyono, a former chief of BIN. Reasons as follow.

First, the court found the fact that the crime was planned in the BIN office. It was likely using BIN facilities.

Second, the court found that BIN, as institution, had been manipulated. It was seen from BIN-seal letter, which requested President Director of Garuda to install Pollycarpus out of normal Garuda’s procedure signed by BIN high ranked officer.
 
Third, the court is likely discovering the pattern of the murder and its systematically planning is getting clear.

Jakarta, 17 January 2008

 

Suciwati : Munir’s wife  
Asmara Nababan: chairman
Usman Hamid: Secretary
Hendardi: a member of steering committee
Rachland Nashidik: : a member of steering committee