OTM Appeal Case, Orbit Merak Terminal Fuel Terminal is Considered Strategic for National Energy

Attorney for M. Kerry Adrianto Riza, M. Patra Zen (Ist)

JAKARTA - The existence of the fuel oil storage terminal (BBM) of PT Orbit Terminal Merak owned by Muhamad Kerry Adrianto Riza is considered important to strengthen national energy resilience.

The lawyer for M. Kerry Adrianto Riza, M. Patra Zen conveyed this in the midst of an appeal against the verdict handed down by the Jakarta Corruption Court. Kerry was sentenced to 15 years in prison and ordered to pay compensation of Rp. 2.9 trillion in the PT Pertamina oil and refinery product governance corruption case.

"If the government says the storage capacity, the capacity to store fuel, it includes the OTM tank," said Patra, who also explained that the company's fuel storage terminal had been leased by PT Pertamina since 2014, Friday, March 13.

However, Kerry's good faith was judged to be the opposite because he was charged with a crime. "He has invested now in prison," said Patra.

This condition is what made Kerry appeal. Because, this case can also set a bad precedent for the investment climate.

Investors, continued Patra, will hesitate to invest capital if their assets can be confiscated, imprisoned, and the payment in the agreement is actually reduced.

"Yes, with this case, is there anyone who wants to invest in a fuel terminal? Is there anyone? Four years have not been paid! When paid, the money was reduced from the agreement. The tank was confiscated, the owner was imprisoned, and he was asked to pay compensation. Do you want to invest in a tank? No," he said.

In addition, the weak protection of SOEs' directors is also a highlight of Patra. "At any time, his mistakes can be found. It's not for the Commissioner to be a supervisor. It's not for the AGM, yes, who gives acquittal and charge, it's not for it," said the lawyer.

Currently, the Kerry Riza legal advisory team has filed an appeal and submitted an appeal memo to the High Court. However, the public prosecutor (JPU) has not submitted it.

This condition, he said, made the appeal filed by the prosecutor automatically dropped because it exceeded the time limit in accordance with the Criminal Procedure Code. So, only the submission from his party can be examined in the High Court and hopes that a re-examination of witnesses and evidence can be carried out.

"KUHAP just stated that a re-examination could be carried out as the first-instance court. Then we ask again, because at the first level we may have been sleepy because it was half three, half two in the morning, so we ask the High Court to examine the witnesses again and other evidence," he said.

This further legal effort is also hoped to provide a wider defense space for the legal advisory team and the defendant. Because this appeal process is important to remove injustice.

"Hopefully because it's not rushed with the detention time, at the first level the trial will be fairer, the arrangements will be better. We are given the freedom to defend ourselves as a team of legal advisers and defendants."