Not Appealing Pinangki's Verdict, The AGO Is Suspected Of Carrying Out Disparity In Law Enforcement And Sparking Demoralization Of Prosecutors

Attorney General's Office Building. (Photo: Doc. Antara)

JAKARTA - The statement by the Deputy Attorney General for Special Crimes (Jampidsus) Ali Mukartono when asked by the media regarding the Pinangki case has now become a hot ball for the prosecutor's office. The reason is, by mentioning that Pinangki has donated BMW to the state, it makes the public wonder about the commitment and consistency of eradicating corruption in the Adhyaksa Corps.

As stated by the prosecutor's observer, Fajar Trio, who considered Ali's statement as evidence of disparity in law enforcement in eradicating racial cases. Because according to him, it is very natural for journalists to highlight the actions of the prosecutor who has not filed an appeal related to the case of the former prosecutor Pinangki.

"Moreover, it can be said that Pinangki is a prosecutor who is the brains of perpetrators of abuse of authority and is willing to be a broker for the Djoktjan (Djoko Tjandra) case. Jampidsus should understand very well the controlling function carried out by journalists in covering news," Fajar said in his statement to reporters, Thursday, June 24.

According to him, Ali's attitude could lead to demoralization of law enforcement for the people of the Prosecutor's Office. Moreover, the alleged disparity in law enforcement is added.

"The Prosecutor's Office has experienced a decline in information disclosure and is suspected of carrying out disparity in law enforcement. The prosecutors who investigated the Pinangki case from the start could be demoralized by hearing this statement," he said.

Fajar also gave examples of the Jiwasraya and Asabri cases. He considered that the Prosecutor's Office was at the forefront of confiscating the assets of the suspects.

"The Prosecutor's Office was very brave when he gave a statement that he had confiscated assets, even though it turned out that some of them did not belong to the defendant, so they demanded the maximum punishment for the defendants. They even stated that they had examined the junk collectors and the IRT (housewives) were very proud of the treatment given to Pinangki," he said.

He also questioned what was wrong with the Pinangki case and what was the difference between it and the Urip case.

"What has the Prosecutor's office hidden in the Pinangki case? How come there is a bargaining position. Is just being given a BMW already an achievement? The Attorney General must take a firm stand against Ali. If necessary, remove it!" said Fajar.

As a law enforcer, according to him, this thought is very shallow in eradicating corruption.

"Is law enforcement only given a BMW, is it finished? This is very scary," he said.

He also concluded that if this condition drags on, the Attorney General's Office will certainly no longer be pure in carrying out its duties as law enforcers.

"It is very dangerous if the Attorney General's Office, led by Mr. ST Burhanuddin, is no longer purely an instrument of the state to enforce the law, and is instead an instrument of power in enforcing the law," he said.

So in conclusion, Jampidsus should be suspected of having made the Tri Krama Adhyaksa doctrine merely a mere lip service because his actions did not represent the honorary doctrine of the prosecutors.

Meanwhile, Trisakti University Criminal Law expert, Abdul Fickar, said that Ali Mukartono's statement that he had proudly confiscated the BMW car from the Pinangki case was a misguided and shameful act.

"I think this is a shameful statement because it seems as if Pinangki has donated a BMW car to the country and this kind of thinking is misguided," said Fickar.

According to him, Pinangki was clearly proven guilty for committing a crime.

"Based on the court's decision, it is submitted to the state, so it is not voluntary," he said.

Fickar said that in this case, the state suffered an invaluable loss due to the loss of human resources for the public prosecutor (SDM JPU) who had been educated and paid by the state to carry out their duties.

"However, instead he became the criminal. How much money has been spent by the state to educate and pay the defendant Pinangki so far, of course, it is never enough if he only paid for it with a BMW car. And the big question is, why is Pinangky still being detained at the Salemba remand center at the Attorney General's Office? Great?" asked Fickar.

He considered that the state also suffered immaterial losses. "It is a great shame because they cannot control their apparatus to commit corruption crimes," he said.

According to him, that should be the thinking of a prosecutor as a state apparatus who is paid to carry out prosecutions.

"Including corruption," he said.

There's still something to highlight besides Pinangki

In addition, Jampidsus also questioned why only the Pinangki case was highlighted, even though there were other suspects.

Previously, the media crew questioned why the prosecutor's office had not filed an appeal regarding the light verdict of the former Pinangki prosecutor. The prosecutor's office also said that they have not decided to file an appeal against the appeal decision of the defendant Pinangki because they are still waiting for a copy of the decision from the DKI Jakarta High Court.

Junior Attorney General for Special Crimes Ali Mukartono actually questioned the media crew why they always pursued news about Pinangki. In fact, according to him, there are many suspects in this case, so it doesn't have to focus on one Pinangki.

"Why is Pinangki being chased, there are many related suspects," he said.

One of the reporters also explained, because many people compared the Jakarta High Court's verdict against Pinangki with the sentence received by Angelina Sondakh, which was actually aggravated at the cassation level. Also compared with a mother in Aceh who was detained with her child for being involved in the case of Information and Electronic Transactions (ITE).

However, Ali actually said that the Pinangki case was different from other cases. He said the court's decision was clear, and his party respected the judge's decision.

"It's clear the court's decision, right! We are waiting for another suspect, there are still many suspects, that's one unit," he said.

The Jampidsus also mentioned that in the Pinangki case, the state obtained a car, in contrast to the investigation of the assets of other suspects, which were difficult to trace.

"In fact, from Pinangki, the state can get a car. Others find it difficult to track it," said Ali.