Lawyer Heru Hidayat Questions Death Penalty Demand, Alludes To Prosecutor's Obsolete Argument

Heru Hidayat/DOK VIA ANTARA

JAKARTA - The attorney for the defendant in the Asabri Heru Hidayat case, Kresna Hutauruk assesses that the Public Prosecutor (JPU) from the Attorney General's Office has run out of ideas by demanding his client with the death penalty. This is evident from the replik of the Public Prosecutor's Office which uses the argument of a court decision that has been annulled in the cassation decision.

"We deeply regret the prosecutor's action using the argument of the District Court's decision which has been overturned by the Cassation Decision only to impose demands outside the indictment, which are clearly deviant. This shows that the public prosecutor has run out of ideas," said Kresna at the Corruption Court, Jakarta, Monday, December 20. .

Kresna said that there was nothing new in the prosecutor's replik other than repeating what was stated in Heru Hidayat's indictment. The only thing new in the prosecutor's replica, said Kresna, is that the public prosecutor quoted the decision of the District Court in the case of Susi Tur Andayani, in which the judge ruled outside the charge.

However, said Kresna, the Public Prosecutor deliberately ignored the fact that the Susi District Court's decision had been overturned by the cassation decision because the District Court judge ruled outside the charge.

"In the duplicate, we have denied the prosecutor's argument because the decision of the District Court in the case has been canceled by the Cassation Decision which has permanent legal force on the grounds that the examination at the District Court and High Court and the panel of judges' deliberation were based on the prosecutor's indictment," explained Kresna.

According to Kresna, the Public Prosecutor must not mislead the public by imposing something that is outside the legal corridor. The demand for the death penalty against Heru Hidayat, he said, was a clear violation of the rules and was excessive because the Public Prosecutor's Office demanded outside the indictment.

"The public prosecutor must not mislead the public and use any means within his power to prosecute the accused outside the indictment," said Kresna.

It is known that in the indictment against Heru Hidayat in the Asabri case, the Public Prosecutor never included Article 2 paragraph (2) of the Anti-Corruption Law. Article 2 paragraph (2) of the Anti-Corruption Law is an article that regulates the death penalty for a defendant if he commits corruption in certain circumstances such as a national disaster, monetary crisis or repetition of a crime. However, in the prosecution, the Public Prosecutor demanded Heru Hidayat with the death penalty.

Kresna also regretted the prosecutor's action in imposing state losses in the Asabri case of Rp. 22 trillion just by counting Asabri's money for the 2012-2019 period. In fact, during that period, Asabri did not only spend money, but also received profits from the sale of shares. Even today, he still owns shares and mutual fund units that are still valuable.

"If the calculation method only counts money out, of course it's not only Asabri who suffer losses, companies around the world will also suffer losses. Therefore, it is clear that the state's loss in this case is not appropriate," concluded Kresna.