LPSK Explains It Refuses To Give AG Protection In Mario Dandy's Case

LPSK/ Photo Office; IST

JAKARTA The Witness and Victim Protection Agency (LPSK) rejected AG's request for protection, in the case of mistreatment of David, which was carried out by the suspect Mario Dandy. The rejection was decided at the LPSK Leadership Court Session, Monday, March 13.

Dijelaskan oleh Ketua LPSK Hasto Atmojo Suroyo, permohonan perlindungan AG ditolak karena tidak memenuhi syarat perlindungan yang diatur dalam Pasal 28 (1) huruf a dan huruf d. Pasal tersebut mengatur tentang syarat formal perlindungan terhadap saksi dan atau korban.

Article 28 (1) letter a, according to Hasto, regulates the importance of the testimony of witnesses and/or victims, as well as letter d, regarding the track record of criminal acts committed by witnesses and/or victims.

"The legal status of the applicant (AG) as a child who is in conflict with the law, is not included in the LPSK protection subjects regulated in Article 5 (3) of Law Number 31 of 2014," said Hasto in Jakarta, Tuesday, March 14.

However, said Hasto, the LPSK Leadership Court then recommended to the Ministry of Women's Empowerment and Child Protection (KemenPPPA) with a copy of KPAI.

Hasto continued, the recommendation contained that the two parties could accompany AG and ensure the fulfillment of AG's rights in the criminal justice process as children in conflict with the law. In particular, continued Hasto, the applicant as a child is in conflict with the law as stipulated in the provisions of Article 3 of Law Number 11 of 2012 concerning the Juvenile Criminal Justice System and Article 64 of Law Number 35 of 2014 concerning Amendments to Law Number 23 of 2002 concerning Child Protection.

In addition to deciding the rejection of AG protection requests, in the case of D-treatment, LPSK received a request for protection for two witnesses, namely R and N. The receipt of a request for protection for both of them, taking into account the request for fulfilling the protection requirements in accordance with Article 28 (1).

Dan, perkara ini (tindak pidana penganiayaan berat) merupakan tindak pidana tertentu sebagaimana diatur dalam UU 31 Tahun 2014, jelas dia.

The type of protection given to R, in the form of fulfilling procedural rights. As for applicant N, the type of protection that was decided was the fulfillment of procedural rights and psychological rehabilitation.