KPK Submits Evidence Of Uncle Birin's Escape To The South Jakarta District Court
The Corruption Eradication Commission (KPK) has deposited a number of evidences related to the determination of the suspect South Kalimantan Governor Sahbirin Noor or Uncle Birin to the South Jakarta District Court (Jaksel).
This was conveyed by the KPK Spokesperson Team Budi Prasetyo when alluding to the continuation of the pretrial hearing proposed by Uncle Birin. It is certain that the forced efforts made are appropriate and that there is evidence.
"KPK also submitted sufficient and valid preliminary evidence to determine the SHB as a suspect. Among them are information, documents, instructions, and electronic evidence in accordance with Article 184 of the Criminal Procedure Code," Budi said in a written statement, Thursday, November 7.
"In addition, evidence related to SHB fled (subsequently submitted, ed)," he continued.
Budi said evidence of Uncle Birin's escape needed to be submitted to the Panel of Judges of the South Jakarta District Court. Thus, the suspect who received the bribe was declared unable to file a pretrial as regulated in SEMA Number 1 of 2018.
Previously reported, the Governor of South Kalimantan, Sahbirin Noor or Uncle Birin, was unknown after being named a suspect in alleged bribery. This determination was made after the KPK conducted a hand arrest operation (OTT) on Sunday, October 6.
"Until now, the respondent is still searching for the whereabouts of the applicant," said KPK Legal Bureau Team Niar Siregar when responding to Uncle Birin's pretrial lawsuit at the South Jakarta District Court (PN), Tuesday, November 5.
"The Respondent has issued the Order (Sprinkap) 06 and the KPK Leadership Decision Letter regarding the prohibition of traveling abroad but the whereabouts of the applicant are not yet known and are still being searched," he continued.
Baca juga:
This reason makes the anti-corruption commission feel there is no need to examine Uncle Birin before determining his legal status. "The determination of the suspect against the applicant is carried out in a absentia," he said.
Even so, Niar said, the determination of the suspect was not carried out without reason. "The Respondent conducted an examination of a number of people whose statements were continuous with evidence obtained by the applicant which further strengthened the involvement and role of the applicant in the alleged corruption crime a quo," he said.