Trial Of Bribery Judge Ronald Tannur, Expert: Not Dissenting Opinion Doesn't Mean Involvement

JAKARTA - Professor of Criminal Law at Airlangga University (Unair) Prof. Nur Basuki Minarno assessed that the absence of dissenting opinion in determining a case decision cannot be directly concluded as the basis for involvement in accepting bribes.

He made this statement when he became an expert for the defendant Heru Hanindyo at the trial of the alleged bribery and gratification case of Gregorius Ronald Tannur's acquittal.

"So it can't be unanimous with that decision, there is no dissenting opinion that it is considered that people who do not accept bribes are considered to have participated in committing bribery, it can't be like that," Basuki said during a trial at the Jakarta Corruption Court, Tuesday, March 18.

According to him, there must be several elements to prove his involvement, such as meetings of minds and physical cooperation in carrying out actions. In the context of accepting bribes, the element of the meeting of mind is the push for giving money or bribery

"If those who decide who happen to have the same opinion, other members cannot immediately accept it are considered as the party who accepts it, because the departure is different, this is the departure because of bribery, this is the departure because according to existing legal facts," he said.

Then, Basuki also conveyed things that could be a benchmark in seeing the judge's decision affected by something. It is said, one of them is that the decision is not based on the facts revealed in the trial.

"This means that he did not see the facts revealed at the trial because they were influenced by bribery. So the easiest thing was earlier," said Basuki.

For information, three non-active judges at the Surabaya District Court were charged with accepting bribes in the form of gifts or promises of Rp4.67 billion and gratuities in cases of alleged bribery and gratuities for granting acquittal to the convicted murder of Ronald Tannur in 2024.

In addition to bribes, the three are also suspected of receiving gratuities in the form of rupiah and various foreign currencies, namely Singapore dollars, Malaysian ringgit, Japanese yen, euro, and Saudi riyals.

The defendant was charged with Article 12 letter c or Article 6 Paragraph (2) or Article 5 Paragraph (2) and Article 12 B in conjunction with Article 18 of Law (UU) Number 31 of 1999 concerning Eradication of Criminal Acts of Corruption as amended by Law Number 20 of 2001 in conjunction with Article 55 Paragraph (1) of the 1st Criminal Code.

The bribes allegedly received by the three judges included Rp1 billion and 308 thousand Singapore dollars or Rp3.67 billion (exchange rate of Rp11,900).