Why Did The Supreme Court Reject The KPK's Cassation And Still Release Samin Tan? Here Is The Detailed Explanation

Samin Tan/Photo: Antara

JAKARTA - The Supreme Court has been open about the reasons why the cassation panel still declares the owner of PT Borneo Lumbung Energi and Metal Tbk. (BLEM), Samin Tan is acquitted of the KPK public prosecutor's charges. The Supreme Court considered that there was no agreement between the giver and the recipient of the bribe.

The decision to reject the cassation submitted by the public prosecutor was taken by the cassation panel: Suhadi, Suharto and Ansori on June 9, 2022.

"The reason for the public prosecutor's cassation cannot be justified because the judex facti did not make a mistake in applying the law, the judex facti has tried the defendant in the a quo case in accordance with the applicable criminal procedural law and did not exceed his authority," stated the case resumer document Number 2268 K/PID. .SUS/2022 on behalf of the defendant Samin Tan which was read on Friday, June 17, quoted from Antara.

Judex facti is the judiciary at the first level, namely the Jakarta Corruption Court (Tipikor) at the Central Jakarta District Court.

In its consideration, the cassation panel stated that from the statements of witnesses and defendant Samin Tan, related to evidence, it was obtained that the Limited Liability Company Asmin Koalindo Tuhub (PT AKT) had terminated the coal mining concession agreement (PKP2B) which resulted in PT AKT being unable to mine anymore. and sell their coal mining products.

Due to the moral burden on the fate of his 4,000 employees, Samin Tan has taken several steps, among others, taking legal action by suing the Decree of the Ministry of Energy and Mineral Resources through the Jakarta Administrative Court but losing on the cassation level.

In addition to filing a lawsuit through the Administrative Court, Samin Tan also met with his colleague, Melchias Marcus Mekeng, as the chairman of the Golkar faction in the DPR. Samin Tan told Melchias Mekeng about the termination of PT AKT by the Ministry of Energy and Mineral Resources.

Melchias Mekeng then introduced Samin Tan to Eni Maulani Saragih and asked Eni Maulani who is also a member of the DPR Golkar faction to ask the Ministry of Energy and Mineral Resources about the termination of PT AKT.

At the request of Melchias Mekeng, Eni together with Melchias Mekeng and Samin Tan met with the then Minister of Energy and Mineral Resources Ignatius Jonan asking about the termination of PT AKT and Ignatius Jonan said that he would still take legal action until he got a final and binding decision.

Ignatius Jonan also said that the termination was a recommendation from the Director General of Mineral and Coal which stated that PT AKT had violated Article 30 of the PKP2B because PT AKT had pledged PT AKT's PKP2B to the Singapore Branch of Standard Chartered Bank.

While managing PT AKT, Eni Maulani once told Melchias Mekeng that Eni needed a lot of money in order to finance her husband's nomination as Regent of Temanggung.

In May—June 2018, Eni Saragih received money from Nenie Afwani and Indri Savatri Purnama Sari. The money was received by Tahta Maharaya as Eni Saragih's expert in the DPR. The total amount received was Rp. 4 billion.

"From the facts it was also revealed that the defendant and Eni Maulani Saragih both stated that there was no deal or agreement regarding the distribution of money in the amount of Rp. 4 billion," the cassation panel stated.

Nenie Afwani, Indri Savatri Purnama, and Tahta Maharaya also did not provide definite information for what the money was given to Eni Saragih.

"Eni Saragih had time to send a thank you message via WA to the defendant for the amount of Rp4 billion. However, the defendant did not respond to the message," said the panel.

Regarding WA messages from Eni Saragih, Nenie Afwani always communicates with Samin Tan, including additional requests from Eni Saragih which Nenie Afwani does not know what he means.

At the trial, it was not revealed about the origin of the money and the designation of the money given by Nenie Afwani to the Maharaya throne;

Based on these facts, said the panel of judges, the first indictment of the public prosecutor is Article 5 paragraph (1) letter a of Law Number 31 of 1999 concerning the Eradication of Corruption Crimes as amended by Law no. 20 of 2001 in conjunction with Article 64 paragraph (1) of the Criminal Code.

"This article is a bribery offense that requires an agreement (meeting of minds) between the giver and the recipient of the bribe, while in this case between the defendant and Eni Maulani Saragih related to the giving of Rp. 4 billion, it is not revealed whether Nenie Afwani was ordered by the defendant to give the money to Eni Saragih," explained the judge.

Although every communication conveyed is always communicated with Samin Tan, it cannot be taken into account that Nenie Afwani has been ordered by Samin Tan to give money to Eni Saragih.

"Thus, the judex facti decision which acquits the defendant of all charges is correct and correct. The rest of the reasons for the public prosecutor's cassation cannot be justified regarding the assessment of the evidence," said the cassation judge.

In connection with this case, Eni Maulani Saragih was sentenced to 6 years in prison with the article on accepting gratification, one of which came from Samin Tan.