Inspector General Napoleon's Attorney Protests, Prosecutors' Demands Only Copy And Paste The Indictment And Do Not Disclose The Facts

Illustration-Jakarta Corruption Eradication Center (Photo: Antara)

JAKARTA - The attorney for the defendant Inspector General Napoleon, Santrawan Paparang protested about the prosecutor's (JPU) charges for the alleged bribery for the removal of red notice.

The charges were not based on facts during the trial process. This is because there are several things that appear in the charges.

"The prosecutor's criminal charges are just a copy and paste of the indictment. So that there are technical matters that should be brought up as facts in the trial, which are not raised," said Santrawan to reporters at the Corruption Court, Jakarta, Tuesday, February 15.

Santrawan said that one example of the facts that the prosecutor did not bring up in the indictment was that Tommy Sumardi's giving of money to Inspector General Napoleon Bonaparte was not proven.

"The information from Tommy Sumardi only relies on himself and we will kill it all in the trial. So the facts that say there has been a transfer of money from Tommy Sumardi to Inspector General of Police Napoleon Bonaparte, are zero (not proven)," said Santrawan.

On that basis, the prosecutor should have handed down a acquittal to Inspector General Napoleon.

"If there are facts in the trial process, the prosecutor should have the courage to sue for acquittal because the state has given the authority to the prosecutors to file an acquittal if they are not proven to demand freedom if they dare," he said.

Previously reported, Inspector General Napoleon Bonaparte was charged with imprisonment of 3 years. In addition, Napoleon was also asked to pay a fine of Rp. 100 million, a subsidiary of 6 months.

"Sentenced the defendant to 3 years imprisonment with an order for the defendant to be detained in a detention facility," said the prosecutor at the trial at the Corruption Court, Central Jakarta, February 15.

The prosecutor's decision regarding the charges against Inspector General Napoleon was based on two considerations. Both things are burdensome and lighten.

For burdensome matters, Inspector General Napoleon is considered not to support the government to eradicate corruption, collusion and nepotism. The defendant's actions damaged the public's trust in law enforcement agencies.

"As a relief, the defendant was cooperative during the trial. Then the defendant had only committed a crime once," he said.

With these two considerations, Napoleon was deemed to have violated Article 5 paragraph 2 in conjunction with Article 5 paragraph 1 letter a or b of Law (UU) of the Republic of Indonesia Number 31 of 1999 as amended by Law Number 20 of 2001 concerning Eradication of Corruption in conjunction with Article 55 paragraph 1 to 1 of the Criminal Code.