JAKARTA - The Attorney General's Office (AGO) has responded to the Indonesian Corruption Watch (ICW) accusation regarding the indictment of the prosecutor Pinangki Sirna Malasari who failed to explain why Djoko Tjandra could easily trust Pinangki. Pinangki was the defendant in a bribery case in the processing of a fatwa at the Supreme Court (MA).
Attorney General for Special Crimes (Jampidsus) Attorney General, Ali Mukartono said that ICW's question had been answered in the Pinangki indictment. Joko Tjandra trusted Pinangki because Rahmat convinced him.
"It was said that Rahmat had sent a photo of him (Pinangki) wearing the attorney's shirt, so he was told to come (meet)," said Ali Mukartono to reporters, Thursday, September 24.
Ali emphasized that the investigation results have not found any suspicion of involvement of other parties. However, regarding Rahmat's status as a witness, the AGO has an answer.
"Knowing wrong? Knowing the wrong time. So the fault of yesterday was, right, he did not have evidence," he said.
As previously reported, the Indonesia Corruption Watch (ICW) assessed that the indictment of the prosecutor Pinangki Sirna Malasari still has not answered a number of things. They even said that something was missing from the indictment.
"ICW doubts the completeness of the Attorney General's file when handing over the case involving Attorney Pinangki Sirna Malasari to the Corruption Court because at least four things were missing in the handling of the case," said ICW researcher Kurnia Ramadhana in a written statement quoted on Thursday, September 24.
First, he highlighted the discussion when Attorney Pinangki met Joko Tjandra in Malaysia, which the prosecutor did not reveal. In fact, this is important to explore because a big fugitive like Joko Tjandra can trust Pinangki, a prosecutor who does not have an important position in the Attorney General's Office.
Kurnia believed, Djoko could not just believe in Pinangki because as a big criminal, of course he would be suspicious of anyone he met unless there was another party behind Pinangki.
The second point, Kurnia highlighted the action plan of Attorney Pinangki to free Djoko Tjandra from legal traps. "The Public Prosecutor has not explained what steps Pinangki has taken in order to make the action plan a success," he said.
The third thing that is missing from the indictment is that the prosecutor has not yet conveyed who was Pinangki's direct network at the Supreme Court. Apart from that, it did not explain what efforts the prosecutor made to obtain the Supreme Court fatwa.
Moreover, a fatwa can only be obtained at the request of a temporary state institution, Pinangki's position only serves as the Head of Sub Division of Monitoring and Evaluation II at the Planning Bureau. Fourth, the indictment also has not provided information regarding the plan to process a fatwa at the Supreme Court.
The English, Chinese, Japanese, Arabic, and French versions are automatically generated by the AI. So there may still be inaccuracies in translating, please always see Indonesian as our main language. (system supported by DigitalSiber.id)
