Andrie Yunus Case Without Involving Civil Court, Yusril Ihza Mahendra Explains the Rules

Jakarta - Coordinating Minister for Legal, Human Rights, Immigration, and Corrections (Menko Kumham Imipas) Yusril Ihza Mahendra said that there was no legal reason to involve ad hoc judges in handling the Andrie Yunus case because there was no element of connection between military and civil crimes.

This was conveyed by Yusril to reporters at the Presidential Palace Complex, Jakarta, Monday, April 27. The case of spraying hard water on KontraS activist Andrie Yunus is increasingly becoming a public concern.

Because, the case is now being transferred to the TNI Military Police Center (Puspom) because the suspect is an active TNI member. Previously, the investigation was carried out by the National Police. A number of parties then asked to present an ad hoc judge because the victim was a civilian.

According to Yusril, until now the police investigation has not named any suspects from the civilian sector, so they cannot immediately be presented to the ad hoc judge. Yusril explained the concept of connectivity in criminal law, namely the existence of a connection between cases if the perpetrators are a mixture of TNI members and civilians. Yusril added that the court's jurisdiction to handle the case cannot be changed on the grounds of civilian victim losses.

According to Yusril, the Military Justice Law is still in force and determines that the subject of the perpetrator is a TNI member and the case is tried in a military court, regardless of the type of criminal act or who is harmed. Yusril recalled the legislative process he had carried out, including the creation of the TNI Law in 2004, but stated that the military justice provisions that regulate until now have not been amended.

Regarding the effort to test the material to the Constitutional Court or the government's initiative to revise the Military Justice Law, Yusril stated that the government had not taken any formal initiative. However, Yusril opened the door for citizens who were interested in testing the law at the Constitutional Court.