AGO Believes That The PTUN Decision Regarding The Attorney General Is Inaccurate

Attorney General ST Burhanuddin (DOK. ANTARA)

JAKARTA - The Attorney General's Office (Kejagung) considers the panel of judges at the Jakarta State Administrative Court (PTUN) to issue an incorrect decision. The PTUN stated that the Attorney General was against the law because he called the Semanggi I and Semanggi II incidents not serious human rights violations.

Junior Attorney General for Civil and State Administration (Jamdatun), Attorney General's Office, Ferry Wibisono, said that at least there was a mistake made by the PTUN panel of judges regarding the Attorney General's statement which was considered a concrete action by the government.

In fact, Ferry emphasized that the statement only conveyed information during a joint working meeting with members of Commission III of the DPR.

"The statement made by the Attorney General in the Commission III meeting was the provision of information, not an act of government administration," Ferry told reporters, Thursday, November 5.

Especially when referring to the Supreme Court Regulation (Perma) number 2 article 1 number 1 of 2019 concerning Government Administration, the Attorney General's statement is not a concrete act.

According to Ferry, a violation should have occurred if the Attorney General committed an action related to handling cases, processing case handling, stages including P-19 or P-21 case files.

"We are of the view that according to the existing categories, the utterance act is not a category as an act of the government in running the government," he said.

Previously, the Jakarta State Administrative Court (PTUN) stated that Attorney General ST Burhanuddin had lost the lawsuit in court. The Attorney General is called against the law because he calls the Semanggi I and Semanggi II incidents not serious human rights violations.

This was stated in the lawsuit decision filed by Sumarsih, the mother of one of the victims of the 1998 tragedy. Sumarsih as the plaintiff and the Attorney General as the defendant. This means that the PTUN Jakarta won Sumarsih's lawsuit.

"On trial, it states that the defendants 'exceptions are not accepted. The main case is that the plaintiffs' claim is completely granted," said Chief Judge Andi Muh Ali Rahman, who was seen on the official website of the Supreme Court Decision Directory, Wednesday, November 4.

The PTUN judge stated Burhanuddin's remarks at the Working Meeting between Commission III of the DPR and the Attorney General on January 16, 2020, which stated that the Semanggi I and Semanggi II incidents were not serious human rights violations, were acts against the law by government bodies and / or officials.

In addition, it also requires the Attorney General to make a statement regarding the handling of alleged serious human rights violations in Semanggi I and II according to the actual situation. In addition, the judge also sentenced the defendant to pay a court fee of Rp. 285,000.

This problem started when ST Burhanuddin held a DPR working meeting last January. During the meeting he mentioned that the shooting cases of students known as Semanggi I and II 1998 were not serious human rights violations.

"The Semanggi I incident, Semanggi II, resulted in the results of the DPR RI Plenary Meeting which stated that the incident was not a serious human rights violation," said Burhanuddin.

However, Burhanuddin did not elaborate on when the DPR plenary meeting he meant to be held. The reason for the incomplete handling of gross human rights is the incomplete files compiled by Komnas HAM investigators.

"The cause of the incompleteness of the file is due to several things, namely the investigator only fulfills some of the results of the investigation, there is insufficient evidence that the research result is unable to clearly identify the alleged perpetrator of the violation," he explained.