Misperception Of Immigration To Remove DPO Joko Tjandra, Witness Napoleon Bonaparte: Responsibilities For Issuance

Corruption Court (DOK. ANTARA)

JAKARTA - Professor of the Faculty of Law, Universitas Airlangga Prof. Dr. Nur Basuki assessed that the NCB Interpol Indonesia Secretary must be responsible for the letter sent to Immigration. This is because the letter has an impact on misperception.

The statement was conveyed by Prof. Nur, when he was a witness, defended the defendant Inspector General Napoleon Bonaparte in the case of alleged bribery for the removal of red notice.

The beginning of the emergence of this statement was when the defendant's lawyer, Gunawan Raka asked Prof. Nur regarding the notification letter from Ses NCB which was misinterpreted by Imgrasi.

"There was a letter shown to immigration that was signed by Ses NCB, the contents of the letter were informative, namely notifying the red notice registered in Lyon, then Divhubinter found out that it was permanently deleted," said Gunawan Raka in a trial at the Corruption Court, Central Jakarta, Monday, 1 February.

"Divhubinter through Ses NCB sent a notification letter to immigration saying that the red notice on behalf of Joko Tjandra had been permanently deleted," he continued.

Gunawan said the letter was informative because it only contained a notification that Joko Tjandra's red notice had been permanently deleted. But the letter was interpreted differently by Immigration.

The Immigration Service assumed that the letter was a recommendation to delete the wanted list (DPO) for Joko Tjandra.

"But the notification is interpreted differently by Immigration, because Immigration provides basic information on the determination of the system because of a red notice, so they remove the name of JST from the list of names," he said.

With that sequence, Gunawan also asked who should be responsible. This is because the difference in perception has a big impact.

"My question is, the series of activities, who is responsible for the system of causality (cause and effect) ?," he asked.

Then, Prof. Nur answered that the party that had to be responsible was the party who published the letter. This is because the party who has signed the letter is the person in charge.

"If in the letter it is only informative, it does not make a request addressed to the agency. However, other agencies translate differently, so if this different translation has an effect, then the person concerned, he must be responsible," he said. .

In fact, Prof. Nur said that the party who published the letter should immediately cancel the purpose of the contents of the letter.

"That's why if it is considered wrong, it should be canceled by the official who made it," he said. "The official must be responsible for canceling," he continued.

Meanwhile, in the case of alleged bribery for the removal of red notice, the investigators named 4 people as suspects until they finally entered court as defendants.

Inspector General Napoleon Bonaparte and Brigadier General Prasetijo Utomo became defendants because they were suspected of receiving bribes for the removal of red notice. Meanwhile, Tommy Sumardi and Djoko Tjandra were named as defendants on suspicion of givers of bribes.