Abolition Law Highlight Tom Lembong And Amnesti Hasto, Expert: Abolition Should Have Been Given From The Beginning

JAKARTA - President Prabowo Subianto gave an abolition to Tom Lembong and amnesty to Hasto Kristiyanto. It is known that Tom Lembong was caught in a sugar import case, he was sentenced to 4.5 years in prison and languished in the Cipinang Detention Center for 9 months. Meanwhile, PDIP Secretary General Hasto Kristiyanto, who was involved in the bribery case for the Interim Replacement (PAW) of former PDIP legislative candidate, Harun Masiku. Hasto's verdict was read out only on July 25. Hasto was sentenced to 3.5 years in prison.

President Prabowo's move drew various responses, especially from among legal experts. UII criminal law expert, Prof. Mudzakkir, highlighted the giving of an abolition to Tom Lembong which he thought should have been given much earlier in the case. Even before the trial begins. The reason is because based on the authority of the President, abolition can abolish the legal process.

So, if given from the start, Tom Lembong does not need to undergo a long judicial process.

"Abolition to Tom Lembong came as a surprise from the criminal law side. From the start, namely before the trial was held, the Abolition was given by the President, so it was more appropriate. So there is no need for a judicial process because Tom Lembong has known that taking the sugar import policy does not cause state losses," said Mudzakkir in a written statement to Rifa Yusya A from VOI, Friday, August 1.

Mudzakkir added that Tom Lembong's ideal legal move was actually deponeering by prosecutors or discretion by police, which could stop the case without having to go to court.

Since Tom Lembong's judicial proceedings continued until the verdict was handed down, Mudzakkir argued that this reflected the failure of law enforcement.

This UII legal expert considers that the President's decision to give abolition after the verdict shows irregularities in the ongoing legal process.

According to him, law enforcement officers, ranging from investigators, public prosecutors, to the panel of judges, have punished innocent people.

"Giving an abolition to Tom Lembong should have been during the prosecution or before the trial. But if it was like this, the attorney general should have been slapped and felt ashamed because he had violated the constitutional rules, namely Article 24 paragraph (1) of the 1945 Constitution. Therefore, investigators, the public prosecutor, and the panel of judges must now publicly apologize to the public for their sins which eventually punish the innocent," said Mudzakkir.

Mudzakkir also suspected that this case might be an order from certain officials or former officials, so that the legal process against Tom Lembong was forced, although it was not necessary.

Mudzakkir also explained the fundamental difference between abolition, amnesty, and clemency.

He emphasized that these three terms have very different legal consequences.

Compared to amnesty and clemency, Mudzakkir said that abolition is a step that is rarely used by the President.

Giving an abolition to Tom Lembong, who was convicted but then his legal process was terminated, indirectly showing an error in law enforcement in Indonesia.

The following is an explanation of the difference between Abolition, Amnesty and Grasi, according to Mudzakkir: