The Court Must Explain The Irregularities In The Postponement Of WanaArtha Customer Lawsuit

JAKARTA - WanaArtha Life customers continue to seek justice after their securities accounts are frozen. They have submitted a pretrial to the South Jakarta District Court, but this failed to be granted because the legal process is already underway.

In fact, pretrial filings have been registered since April 2020 but it was only decided in June 2020. Now, they have also filed a class action attempt in July, and have only been on trial recently.

Regarding this, Criminal law expert Mudzakir considered that there were irregularities that had to be revealed. The court must explain the withdrawal over the months of trial.

"If the reasons are not strong, the postponement of three months is unusual and there is something odd or inappropriate," he said in a written statement received on Wednesday, November 3.

Mudzakir emphasized that customers can file a pretrial as a third party with an interest in the prosecutor's action confiscating the customer's assets. This is because, he continued, the customer is not the perpetrator of a criminal act and the asset does not come from a criminal act.

The Judicial Commission (KY), responding to this irregularity, invited customers to report it. KY commissioner Maradaman Harahap has invited customers to report irregularities and suspected violations of the code of ethics by judges.

He admitted that there were WanaArtha Life customers who came and reported. However, the reporting is related to legal protection for policyholders.

"The policy holder's report is not a matter of pretrial," he said briefly

As is known, the Attorney General's Office suspended WanaArtha's Securities Account with allegations related to the Jiwasraya case and the perpetrator Benny Tjokro. However, other customers feel very disadvantaged because they have no connection whatsoever with Benny Tjokro.

Separately, one of WanaArtha Wahjudi's customers said, until whenever he would try to make their accounts reusable.

"We, the policyholders (PP), will also file an objection through a class action. For those who have filed a lawsuit, we will also file an objection letter. We PP are also still discussing submitting through groups in PP and individually, we are currently discussing the mechanism such as what, "he said.

He admitted that he was surprised by the protracted trial at the South Jakarta District Court.

"That's what we really regret. Why do we have to wait for months for a trial like that. Meanwhile, Jiwasraya's trial can be completed in 120 days. So what is this conspiracy? We ordinary people do not know. But there is something that should be strongly suspected that there is a conspiracy. "he said.

He also suspects that this class action is not liked by the Attorney General's Office, OJK, and 13 Investment Managers. Wahjudi said that law enforcers should have paid attention to whether the act carried out, namely freezing by the state, was a wise move.

"Are those actions in accordance with the Criminal Code / Criminal Procedure Code, according to the facts of the trial or not or are they all removed and what applies is the law of the Ki Dalang (the mastermind who regulates this). I do not know who Ki Dalang is. This is the one who regulates everything. . One strange thing is why the BPK examination is only 10 years not 15 years. Why not starting from 2003. This must be questioned. But ask who? The grass is shaking? " he asked.

He explained that the third trial of the class action case was held on November 30, 2020. But he predicts a fourth trial in 2021.

"So the escalation is from 1 to 2 to 3, the escalation could be the end of the first semester of 2021. If he is consistent in the sense of following Ki Dalang's setting, it will be the end of the first semester of 2021. It is interesting to analyze. What's behind this," he said.

Wahjudi likened, an ant who is treated arbitrarily, he will bite. "This ant is a weak animal. If it wants to be trampled before it dies, it will bite. We will not give up until it dies in the field," he said.

He emphasized that this was done so that customer money could come back and the state would implement the truth. He also said the PPs had already reported to the Judicial Commission (KY) to ask for legal protection and oversee the Jiwasraya trial.

"We were instead asked to report to prove that the judge violated behavior or ethics," he said.