Victims Of Net89 Trading Robot Consider There Are Irregularities In The Legal Handling Process At The Tangerang District Court

JAKARTA The victim of the Net89 trading robot admitted that he was not satisfied with the results of the Tangerang District Court's decision which was considered odd in handling the law.

One of the victim's attorneys, Herdiyan Saksono Zoulba said that his party together with the attorneys of the victims of Net89, united to resolve the issue of injustice of trading robots that commit massive fraud against their victims.

Herdiyan explained that recently he and several attorneys for victims of Net89 visited the Deputy Attorney General for General Crimes (Jampidum) of the Attorney General's Office, to question the continuation of legal handling which had tried at the Tangerang District Court.

"We have an audience with Jampidum to question what the next legal steps are? Because we represent the victims, this is very, very disappointing with yesterday's Tangerang court decision. Please respond to Jampidum," said Herdiyan in a written statement, Tuesday, November 14.

Herdiyan also emphasized that there were many victims of the Net89 trading robot. In fact, each law office receives hundreds of reports and continues to grow.

In the Justice Cakrawala Association, there are three Law Firms or law offices that each have reports from victims with a total loss of tens of billions of rupiah. We have several representing several victims. I myself am 846 people with a loss value of IDR 72 billion," explained Herdiyan.

According to preliminary records, each law firm received reports of more than hundreds of victims of Net89.

"For me, 131 people have lost Rp33 billion," said Ferry Yuli Irawan, another victim's attorney.

"I am as many as 896 people with a total loss of Rp115 billion," said the party representing Rachim Syahputra.

"We are from MCA, the number of victims is 476 people, the loss is Rp. 76 billion," said the party representing Muhammad Zainul Arifin.

"We join, Net89 reporters ask for the continuation of the handling of this case. The only (handling crime) trading robot whose results are disappointing," continued Herdiyan.

Representative victim Muhammad Zainul Arifin admitted that he had found many irregularities between the Tangerang District Court and the defendant's trial process.

"We found several irregularities, especially regarding the transfer of files to the court." said the representative of the victim Muhammad Zainul Arifin.

The advocate who is a member of Cakrawala Keadilan said that irregularities during the pretrial were not supposed to be accepted by the defendant.

The evidence, continued Herdiyan, was complete and had been presented at the trial. However, these lawyers suspect that there were irregularities between the Tangerang District Court and Jampidum. "The irregularities that need to be conveyed are pretrial issues. Seeing the decision, there is evidence that according to the judge is invalid. Even though if we see evidence, one of which is the transaction of the victim, we have transferred it to the suspect, but it is disallowed," he explained.

According to these legal experts, that the headquarters is complete and P21 should no longer have pretrial.

Not only that, said Herdiyan, after the file has been P21 and submitted to the prosecutor's office to immediately conduct a trial, the pretrial itself has automatically died and the suspect has become a defendant.

"Actually, when the suspects had their files entered the court they became defendants. This means that the pretrial has fallen," he said.

Herdiyan also revealed that in this case there were still two suspects who fled abroad. Because there are still suspects who have fled, according to him, the trial must continue.

"There were two suspects who fled to Cambodia. I think even though the person fled or fled, the trial had to keep going and there was an element of weighting there." he concluded.

He hopes that justice stakeholders in Indonesia, especially in the case of Net89 trading robot fraud, must be thoroughly investigated to the roots, and the victims' funds returned.

"Because the previously trading robot clearly continued until there was a court decision in which all the victims' funds were returned to the victim." concluded Herdiyan.