Understanding Pleidoi As The Right Of Ferdy Sambo And The Defendants To Convince The Judge

JAKARTA – The defendants in the murder case of Brigadier Nofriansyah Yosua Hutabarat have submitted their pleidoi or memorandum of defense at the South Jakarta District Court. The defendants Ferdy Sambo, Ricky Rizal, and Kuat Maruf on January 24, 2023, while the defendants Richard Eliezer and Putri Candrawathi on January 25, 2023. So, what is pleidoi?

Pleidoi, according to a legal observer from Mataram University, Farizal, is the defendant's right. Contains responses to the demands of the public prosecutor.

“Pleidoi was traced starting from what was stated at the trial to what was proven at the trial based on the description of the facts that were revealed. Starting with opening words, such as to the honorable panel of judges, public prosecutors, and others," said Farizal to VOI, Wednesday (25/1)

The content of the defense pleidoi continues to explain the reasons why the defendant committed the crime and the background of the defendant in committing the crime. Then a description of the facts of the trial and a description of the evidence and witnesses are explained. Finally, said Farizal, "The expectations of the accused and legal advisers are regarding the demands of the public prosecutor."

Through pleidoi, according to a criminal law expert from Trisakti University, Abdul Fickar Hadjar, the defendant tried to convince the judge whether or not the lawsuits submitted by the public prosecutor were appropriate.

For example in Ferdy Sambo's defense plea entitled A Point of Hope in a Congested Court Room. He continued to defend himself that the criminal act he had committed was a response to other acts he had experienced before, namely acts that had damaged his dignity as a husband, man, and leader.

“On July 8, 2022, my beloved wife Putri Candrawati arrived from Magelang and said that she had been raped by the late Yosua the day before at our house in Magelang. My wife Putri Candrawati continued to cry while telling me how the incident had happened to her. There are no words that I can express at that time the world seemed to stop spinning, and a feeling of boiling in my heart was turbulent, my brain was tangled imagining all these stories," a fragment of Ferdy Sambo's plea statement.

Even though he was full of anger, Ferdy Sambo denied having given instructions to his aide, the defendant Richard Eliezer, to kill Yosua. Engineering to cover up the case was also done just to protect Richard.

But what happened was that society seemed to position him as the biggest criminal in human history. Also accused of being a drug dealer, gambling, and other.

Ferdy Sambo, in the concluding line of his defense statement, then shows his track record as a member of the National Police who has never committed a criminal, disciplinary, or code of ethics violation. In fact, he explained a series of awards he had received starting from the Bhayangkara Pratama star from the President and 6 gold pins for the National Police Chief for disclosing various important cases in the police.

"Yes, the point is to convince the judge so he can get a reduced sentence, from human to life imprisonment as demanded by the prosecutor. Indeed, it is a function of pleidoi. As for the pleidoi title, that's just the complement. It's not substantive," Fickar told VOI, Wednesday (25/1).

Likewise, the contents of Putri Candrawathi's defense statement entitled, If God Allows, I Want to Hug Our Children Again. From the title alone, it is clear that Putri's defense. It seems to be a hope for the judge to consider her role as a mother who has 4 children.

“My husband and I have four children. Everything really needs parental attention and affection, especially from a mother. Our youngest child is 1 year and 10 months old, and his older siblings are still at school. They certainly need the presence of a mother beside them," a fragment of Putri Candrawathi's plea.

Putri, in the content of her plea, also implied that she asked the judge to release her from criminal charges. Putri remained firm in stating that she was a victim of sexual violence and abuse by Joshua. She also admitted that she had never wanted, planned, or done anything together to kill Joshua.

Prerogative

However, the judge has the prerogative to convict a defendant guilty or not, including the imposition of a sentence based on his conviction. Of course, said Fickar, by looking at and analyzing the facts at trial.

In the end, the judge may take three alternative decisions. Accepting the entire plea of ​​the defendant (and lightly punishing the defendant), accepting a portion of the plea of ​​the defendant (considering and reducing the number of sentences to be handed down), rejecting the plea of ​​the entire defense (not considering and granting the demands of the public prosecutor in full), and convicting the defendant.

The basis is Article 6 paragraph (2) of the Republic of Indonesia Law No. 48 of 2009 concerning Judicial Power, "No one can be sentenced to a crime, unless the court because of valid means of proof according to law, gets the conviction that someone who is deemed to be the responsible answer, has been guilty of the act he was accused of.”

Digging the Facts

In trial practice, according to judge Binsar M. Gultom, there were times when there was not a single primary piece of evidence (eyewitnesses) who directly saw a criminal incident. However, this does not mean that the judge just gave up and released the defendant from the law. The judge must continue to explore the facts that occurred in court from various points of view according to the judge's belief through instructions and observations, as well as legal rules that develop and apply.

From a series of excavations of legal facts, there were also times when the defendant argued that he was not the perpetrator of a criminal incident. According to Binsar, the judge must be able to predict that the quality of the evidentiary value of the defendant's testimony is lower than other evidence, such as witness testimony, expert testimony, and instructions.

"Why is that? Because according to Article 189 paragraph 3 of the Criminal Procedure Code the defendant's statement only applies to himself. Even though the defendant often denies himself as the perpetrator of a criminal incident or may admit to the act, the judge cannot blindly believe the defendant's confession," said Binsar in the book 'Pandangan Kritis Seorang Hakim'.

The judge must consider and analyze the information comprehensively and relate it to the existing evidence and evidence.

"When the judge thinks the defendant is lying, that is the defendant's right, the judge may not force the defendant to admit what he has done. Just let him speak as it is. However, the voice of the judge's feelings must be able to speak through instructions and observations during the trial," according to Binsar, High Court Judge of the Jakarta High Court in his book.