Revision Of Environmental Losses Data In Timah Picu Polemic Commercial Procedure Case

JAKARTA The trial of the corruption case of tin trading at the Central Jakarta Corruption Court (Tipikor) on Friday, November 15 presented an expert witness from the Public Prosecutor (JPU), Prof. Bambang Heru. In his testimony, he revealed a significant difference related to environmental loss data which became the focus of public attention.

According to Prof. Bambang, environmental losses in this case only reached Rp150 trillion, much different from the Rp271 trillion reported by the Financial and Development Supervisory Agency (BPKP). This difference raises a polemic that requires further clarification.

Revision Of BAP And New Facts

New facts were revealed in the trial after Prof. Bambang revised the Minutes of Investigation (BAP) regarding the area of forest areas managed by PT Timah. This revision was made after a confrontation with employees of the Bangka Belitung Province Environment and Forestry Service (LHK).

The BAP revision which was carried out after a confrontation with the Bangka Belitung LHK Service showed significant changes in data on the area of the affected forest area. This has a direct impact on the calculation of environmental losses," said Legal Advisor Thamron Andy Novi Nababan, during the trial.

The difference in numbers between Prof. Bambang and BPKP reports became the main issue in the trial. According to Prof. Bambang, the figure of IDR 150 trillion includes environmental losses in the 2019-2020 period, while BPKP reports include other components that are considered less real.

"The environmental loss in the 2019-2020 period was only IDR 150 trillion. We see that there are components in the BPKP report that need to be reviewed because they may contain invalid data," said Andy, the defendant's legal adviser.

Impact On Case Development

This difference in loss data has a significant impact on the course of the trial. The court is now faced with a challenge to ensure the accuracy of the data presented by both parties. Prof.'s BAP revision is also a concern because it affects environmental losses.

With so many data differences sticking out, this case has increasingly attracted public attention. The legal process is expected to provide clarity and ensure a fair decision.

The trial will continue next week with the agenda of hearing expert statements presented by the defendant's Legal Advisor.