Unpad Legal Expert Criticizes Mardani H Maming's Case Decision: Not Based On Strong Evidence

Unpada academics criticized Mardani H. Maming's court decision. (IST)

JAKARTA - The Mardani H Maming case continues to be in the spotlight of various circles. After a number of legal experts in various regions expressed their position, now it is the turn of academics from the Faculty of Law, Padjadjaran University (Unpad), Bandung, to speak up. They urged that Mardani H Maming be released for the sake of law.

The Unpad Faculty of Law Annotation Team presented their study regarding the Mardani H Maming case at the Postgraduate Program Auditorium at the Unpad Faculty of Law, Friday, October 18, 2024.

Some academics who presented the results of this study include: Dr. Sigid Suseno, SH, M. Hum, Dr. Somawijaya, SH, MH, Dr. Elis Rusmiati, SH, MH, Dr. Erika Magdalena Chandra, SH, MH, Budi Arta Atmaja, SH, MH, and Septo Ahadasmasasmita, SH, LL.M.

In his presentation, Dr. Somawijaya highlighted the application of Article 12 letter b of the Law on the Eradication of Corruption Crimes (UU PTPK) against Mardani H Maming, regarding the issuance of Tanah Bumbu Regent Decree No. 296 of 2011 concerning the transfer of mining business permits. According to him, the application of the article was a serious mistake.

"Mardani H Maming's actions do not fulfill the criminal element as formulated in Article 12 letter b of the PTPK Law, especially based on the facts of the trial which only relies on one piece of evidence," said Somawijaya in a written statement received by VOI.

Unpad academics emphasized that the issuance of the Regent's Decree did not violate the applicable procedures or SOPs, and did not conflict with Article 93 of Law Number 4 of 2009 concerning Mineral and Coal Mining. According to them, Mardani H Maming only carries out the authority of local governments in managing mining.

In addition, the accusation that Mardani H Maming received a gift or gratuity was also considered unfounded. Somawijaya emphasized that during the trial, there was no evidence to suggest a causal relationship between receiving the prize and issuing the decree.

Dr. Elis Rusmiati also criticized the additional criminal offense in the form of replacement money worth Rp 110 billion. He considered that this step was contrary to Article 18 of the PTPK Law, because there was no state loss in the case.

On the basis of the facts of the trial, the Rp 110 billion money cannot be categorized as state losses. The money is a legal dividend," said Elis.

Based on the study, the Unpad Faculty of Law Annotation Team requested that Mardani H Maming be released immediately. They also emphasized the importance of maintaining legal justice in Indonesia.

"The defendant should have been declared free, all charges against him revoked, and his good name restored," concluded Dr. Somawijaya.