Bridge Corruption In Pidie Jaya Aceh Begins Trial, Public Prosecutor Calls Defendants Not Hiring Experts

The accused was accused of corruption in the construction of a bridge (Photo: ANTARA)

ACEH - The Banda Aceh Corruption Court began hearing the alleged corruption case in the construction of a bridge in Pidie Jaya Regency, Thursday, June 17 today. The trial of the case with a contract value of Rp. 11.2 billion took place in the main courtroom of the Banda Aceh District Court.

The panel of judges was chaired by Nani Sukmawati, accompanied by Eti Astuti and Edwar, each as member judges and took place virtually. Present were public prosecutors (JPU) Muhzan, Sabah, and Andrin from the Pidie Jaya District Attorney's Office.

One of the four defendants came directly to the courtroom. Meanwhile, the other three defendants attended the trial from the Class IIB Rutan in Banda Aceh, where they had been detained so far.

The four defendants are Mahlizar as the work partner. The defendant Mahlizar attended the trial accompanied by his team of legal advisers, Zulfan, Junaidi, and Muhammad Nasir.

Then, the defendant Teuku Raja Alkausar as the Technical Implementation Officer (PPTK) at the Aceh Disaster Management Agency (BPBA), as well as the defendant Ahmad Zakiani Hasan and the defendant Murtadha as the bridge construction supervisor consultant. The three defendants were accompanied by legal counsel Kasibun Daluay, Faisal, and friends.

The prosecutor in his indictment stated that the construction of the Pangwa Bridge in Pidie Jaya Regency was carried out by BPBA for the 2017 and 2018 fiscal years with a budget value of Rp. 11.2 billion.

The bridge construction was carried out after the previous bridge was damaged by the earthquake that hit Pidie Jaya Regency. The Public Prosecutor said that the defendant Mahlizar was the President Director of PT Zarnita Abadi along with the other defendants carrying out the construction work on the construction of the bridge. However, based on expert inspection, the construction work did not meet specifications.

"In addition, the volume of floor casting work is also less, so it does not fulfill the work contract. However, the defendant has disbursed 100 percent of the work. In addition, the defendant also did not employ experts as in the contract documents," said the public prosecutor.

As a result of the actions of the defendants, they caused a loss of Rp. 950.6 million to the state finances, or at least to have significantly harmed the state's finances to Rp. 417.27 million more, said the Public Prosecutor.

The prosecutor stated that the defendant Mahlizar had returned part of the state financial loss of Rp150 million. The money was then deposited in the Pidie Jaya Prosecutor's account in a bank account.

The actions of the defendants as regulated and subject to criminal penalties violate Article 2 paragraph (1) in conjunction with Article 18 of Law Number 31 of 1999 concerning the Eradication of Criminal Acts of Corruption as amended by Law Number 20 of 2001 in conjunction with Article 55 paragraph (1) of the 1st Criminal Code, so that they are threatened with the crime of violating Article 3 in conjunction with Article 18 of Law Number 31 of 1999 as amended by Law Number 20 of 2001 in conjunction with Article 55 paragraph (1) of the 1st Criminal Code.

The panel of judges continued the trial on Thursday (24/6), with the agenda of hearing the exceptions of the defendants and their legal advisors as well as examining witnesses.

The defendant Mahlizar through his legal advisor Zulfan accompanied by Junaidi and Muhammad Nasir from the Junaidi Law Office, Zulfan & Partners, said that they had understood the main points of the prosecutor's indictment.

"However, we will make exceptions and raise objections to the prosecutor's indictment at the next trial," said Zulfan.

According to Zulfan, his client, namely the defendant Mahlizar, is a partner in implementing the Pangwa Bridge construction project in Pidie Jaya Regency. As a partner, the defendant has fulfilled all his obligations according to the agreed contract.

"There is no unlawful act in the implementation of the agreement. All work has been carried out according to the work contract document," said Zulfan.

Zulfan said his client Mahlizar came to court with a bandage on his ear, because he had just had eardrum surgery.

"Although not fully recovered, our client still fulfills his obligations to attend the trial and respect the ongoing legal process," said Zulfan.