Febrie Case: Money Laundering Expert Urges Full Probe, Including Other Suspected Parties

JAKARTA - Money Laundering Criminal Law (TPPU) expert Yenti Garnasih urges law enforcement officials, especially the Attorney General's Office, to thoroughly investigate the alleged involvement of other parties in the alleged corruption and money laundering criminal case (TPPU) which dragged former Deputy Attorney General for Special Crimes (Jampidsus), Febrie Adriansyah.

Yenti assessed that the investigation should not stop at one suspect. According to him, it is very possible that there are other parties who have a greater role in the case and must also be held accountable if proven to be involved.

"Don't rush to conclude that he is the only one who should be severely punished. It could be that later other parties will also be found to have a major role and are equally deserving of a severe sentence," said Yenti, Wednesday, July 22.

According to Yenti, if the alleged corruption and TPPU against Febrie Adriansyah are proven in court, then a heavy sentence should be imposed considering that the person concerned is a law enforcement officer who has been tasked with handling corruption cases.

"However, if it is proven that they have committed corruption and TPPU, then the punishment should indeed be the heaviest. Because, the person concerned is a high-ranking official in the enforcement of criminal law on corruption. So it is natural that public expectations of his integrity are also very high," he said.

Yenti also assessed that the amount of the alleged gratification value or kickback in the case indicated the existence of an alleged crime of origin with a much larger value.

"If the bribe is that big, then the question is, how big is the case that is being 'smoothed' or covered? The logic is simple. For example, if someone commits corruption of Rp. 1 trillion, it is impossible for him to give Rp. 2 trillion to the person who helped him. Surely the amount of the bribe is much smaller than the value of the main crime," he said.

"This means that if the value of the haram service alone is very large, then the main matter that is protected is likely to be much greater. Therefore, I hope that this case will be thoroughly investigated," he continued.

In addition to encouraging the prosecution of other parties, Yenti also highlighted the transfer of handling cases to the Attorney General's Office. According to him, in conditions that have the potential to create conflicts of interest, the Corruption Eradication Commission (KPK) has a legal basis to take over the handling of cases.

"If it is cross-agency, the instrument is only in the KPK Law. The KPK was indeed formed as a center for eradicating corruption. This is not about degrading the police or the prosecutor's office. Indeed, the design of our legal system is like that. Therefore, the KPK is authorized to take over cases if there is a conflict of interest, the handling is problematic, or it becomes a public spotlight," concluded Yenti.