KY Analysis Of Police Free Sentences Defendant In Child Abuse Case At Jayapura District Court

ILLUSTRATION BETWEEN

The Judicial Commission (KY) will investigate the acquittal handed down by the panel of judges at the Jayapura District Court (PN) against a police officer with the initials AFH, the defendant in the alleged child molestation case.

KY member Mukti Fajar Nur Dewata said that his party needed to analyze the decision of the panel of judges first, especially part of legal considerations, to find out whether or not there were allegations of violations of the Code of Ethics and Code of Conduct of Judges (KEPPH).

KY needs to study the decision more deeply, especially the judge's consideration which makes the reason for the absence of witnesses as the basis for releasing. Is there no other evidence submitted by the prosecutor in the trial, such as post-mortem and others? In cases of sexual harassment, judges need to dig up facts as other evidence," he said as quoted by ANTARA, Monday, March 24.

On the other hand, Mukti confirmed that KY had received reports of alleged violations of the KEPPH against the panel of judges at the Jayapura District Court who tried the case. The report was received by the KY liaison in Jayapura, Papua (18/3).

"Furthermore, the report will verify the completeness of the administrative requirements and the substance to be registered," continued Mukti.

Previously, the panel of judges at the Jayapura District Court decided that the defendant AFH was not proven guilty as the public prosecutor's indictment. Therefore, AFH was acquitted. Case Number 329/Pid.Sus/2024/PN Jap was decided by Chief Judge Zaka Talpatty on Thursday, January 23, 2025.

"Declaring that the AFH Defendant is not legally and convincingly proven guilty of committing a criminal act as charged by the public prosecutor in the first alternative indictment or the second alternative indictment," reads the verdict quoted from the Jayapura District Court Case Investigation Information System.

This is different from the public prosecutor who demanded that the defendant AFH be sentenced to 12 years in prison, reduced as long as he is in temporary detention and a fine of Rp. 200,000,000, subsidiary to imprisonment for 6 months.

The defendant AFH was charged with being legally and convincingly proven guilty of committing a criminal act of violence or threats of violence, forcing, children to commit or allow obscene acts.

AFH is considered to have violated Article 76E of Law Number 35 of 2014 concerning Child Protection in conjunction with Article 82 paragraph (1) of Law Number 17 of 2016 concerning Stipulation of Government Regulation in Lieu of Law (Perpu) Number 1 of 2016 concerning Child Protection into Law.

By Fath Putra Mulya