Attorney General's Office Submits Appeal Regarding PTUN Decision Regarding Semanggi Tragedy

Attorney General's Office (Irfan Meidianto / VOI)

JAKARTA - The Attorney General's Office (Kejagung) filed an appeal to the High State Administrative Court (PTTUN) regarding the decision of the State Administrative Court (PTUN) regarding Attorney General ST Burhanuddin who was found guilty in the Semanggi Tragedy not a serious human rights violation.

"News from the State Attorney General's Office has made an appeal on November 9," said Head of the Attorney General's Office of Legal Information, Hari Setiyono, to reporters, Thursday, November 12.

Hari said that his party was still waiting for the results of the examination of the files by the panel of judges from the PTUN.

"Usually the appellate judges only examine the files, but it does not rule out the possibility of calling the parties," he said.

Previously, the Deputy Attorney General for Civil and State Administration (Jamdatun) at the AGO Ferry Wibisono said 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, the statement was only the delivery of information during a joint working meeting with members of Commission III of the DPR RI.

"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.

Supposedly, the violation occurred if the Attorney General took actions related to handling cases, processing case handling, stages including P19 or P21 case files.

The Jakarta State Administrative Court (PTUN) stated that Attorney General ST Burhanuddin 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 is referred to 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 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, Semanggi II events have resulted in the DPR RI Plenary Session stating that the incident was not a gross 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 cannot clearly identify the alleged perpetrator of the violation," he explained.