Asking For Pretrial Of Ex-Directorate General Of Taxes To Be Rejected, KPK Submits 115 Evidence And 2 Expert Witnesses

Gedung KPK (Irfan Meidianto/VOI)

JAKARTA - The Corruption Eradication Commission (KPK) asked the pretrial judge, the former Director of Audit and Collection of the Directorate General of Taxes at the Ministry of Finance, Angin Prayitno Aji (APA) to reject the lawsuit filed.

The anti-corruption commission has submitted 115 pieces of evidence and 2 experts during the pretrial hearing at the South Jakarta District Court.

"The KPK Legal Bureau team has presented and presented various evidences to refute all the arguments in the application for a pretrial lawsuit filed by the suspect APA at the South Jakarta District Court," Acting KPK Spokesperson for Enforcement Affairs Ali Fikri told reporters quoted Wednesday, July 28.

This team has also submitted the conclusion of the application to the pretrial single judge on Monday, July 26 yesterday. The KPK hopes that the judges of the South Jakarta District Court can reject the application submitted by Angin at the reading of the verdict scheduled for Wednesday, July 28.

The conclusions put forward by the KPK Legal Bureau to a single judge are as follows: 1. Rejecting the Pretrial application submitted by the suspect APA or at least stating that the Pretrial application is unacceptable; 2. To declare that the investigation carried out by the KPK has been based on an Investigation Order which is valid according to law and has binding force; 3. To declare that the searches and seizures carried out by the Corruption Eradication Commission based on the Corruption Eradication Commission Board Search Permit are valid according to law and have binding legal force; To declare that the detention of Tsk APA has been based on the Detention Order is legal and has binding force; 5. Stating that all KPK actions during the investigation process are legal and based on law and have binding power.

Previously, Angin Prayitno's attorney, Syaefullah Hamid said that the KPK's determination of the suspect was not in accordance with the Criminal Procedure Code. Even the investigation process until the investigation is considered not the domain of the KPK.

In addition, discrepancies between the investigation and investigation processes were also seen during the trial process. One example is that the KPK does not have sufficient evidence to identify a suspect.

"The Sprindik was published on February 4, 2021, the SPDP as well as the determination of the suspect on February 5, 2021, while it was acknowledged by the respondent (KPK) that the examination of witnesses in the investigation had only begun on April 22, 2021 and confiscation had only begun March 31, 2021, while the search was on February 10, 2021, everything was done after the determination of the suspect," said Syaefullah in his statement, Tuesday, July 27.