The pretrial decision submitted by the former Secretary of the Riau DPRD, Muflihun, caused a number of irregularities. One of them, the Pekanbaru District Court (PN) actually annulled the judge's determination regarding the confiscation of assets in the alleged corruption case being handled by the Riau Police.
The assets that became the object of the dispute were in the form of a house on Jalan Sakundala, Pekanbaru, as well as an apartment unit in the Nagoya area, Batam.
The trial for the pretrial decision was held at the Pekanbaru District Court, Wednesday, September 17. During the trial, the sole judge Dedy read out the verdict that granted part of Muflihun's request. Meanwhile, the respondent in the lawsuit is the Riau Police Criminal Investigation Sub-Directorate III.
In his consideration, the judge said that the applicant adhered to the statement of the absence of state losses in the alleged corruption case of official travel outside the fictitious region at the Riau DPRD Secretariat for the 2020-2021 fiscal year. Referring to the results of the financial audit conducted by BPK for TA. 2020-2021
However, the facts revealed are different. The Supreme Audit Agency (BPK) did find state losses in this case based on sampling tests, not the whole of the objects being audited. However, the loss has been returned with a value of more than Rp1 billion during the two fiscal years. BPK audit itself has the aim of assessing the fairness of financial reports alone.
Unlike BPK, the Financial and Development Supervisory Agency (BPKP) conducted an Audit on Calculation of State Losses (PKN) at the request of investigators. The audit is an audit with a specific purpose. From the results of the BPKP audit, it was found that state losses were much greater, reaching more than Rp195 billion.
Thus, the BPK and BPKP audits are two different things, so that claims of the absence of state losses in this case are considered misleading.
The petitioner also stated that houses on Jalan Sakundala and apartments in Batam had been reported in the State Administrators Wealth Report (LHKPN). However, the results of media searches through the KPK e-LHKPN website in 2020-2021 show that the two assets are not listed in the report.
The facts of the trial also revealed that the house on Jalan Sakundala was purchased using fictitious official travel funds. Evidence of payment for the purchase of the house was made by the applicant's subordinates. The same thing happened to the apartment in Batam.
During the trial, investigators presented evidence from the apartment manager and the payment party.
Another interesting thing was revealed during the examination at the Riau Police. Muflihun did not recognize the two assets as his. Therefore, the confiscation was carried out on the party that controlled the assets.
However, assets that were previously not recognized were actually filed as objects of a lawsuit in the pretrial. This step indirectly becomes an acknowledgment that the assets do belong to Muflihun.
It should be understood, LHKPN is not a document that proves the validity of the origin of assets, but only a form of the obligation to report assets of state administrators.
A number of questions then arose regarding the judge's decision. Is the Pekanbaru District Court authorized to declare it invalid to determine the confiscation issued by the Batam District Court, even though it is not its legal product? In addition, why did the Pekanbaru District Court cancel the special confiscation permit that they previously issued on their own?
If from the start the request for a confiscation permit was deemed invalid, the application should have been rejected. It was not canceled after the investigator carried out the confiscation based on the permission that had been granted by the court.
Responding to the decision of the sole judge of the Pekanbaru District Court, Dedy, who granted the pretrial lawsuit regarding the confiscation of assets, the Director of Special Criminal Investigation (Dirreskrimsus) of the Riau Police, Kombes Pol Ade Kuncoro, emphasized that his party still respects the decision.
"We respect the decision of the pretrial judge. We will first study the judges' considerations so that they accept the petitioner's lawsuit, after we receive a copy of the verdict," said Kombes Ade in his statement, Thursday, September 18.
He emphasized that the investigation into the alleged fictitious SPPD corruption case at the Riau DPRD Secretariat would continue. "The investigation continues because what the judge received was only related to the confiscation of one house in Pekanbaru and one apartment in Batam," said Kombes Ade.
The English, Chinese, Japanese, Arabic, and French versions are automatically generated by the AI. So there may still be inaccuracies in translating, please always see Indonesian as our main language. (system supported by DigitalSiber.id)
