RJ Lino Mentions His Case Enters Civil, KPK Prosecutor Responds: That Opinion Enters The Subject Matter

RJ Lino/ Antara

JAKARTA - The Public Prosecutor (JPU) of the Corruption Eradication Commission (KPK) answered the objections of former President Director of PT Pelabuhan Indonesia II (Persero) Richard Joost Lino aka RJ Lino who asked the judge to reject the indictment because he considered the case to be in the civil sphere.

"The opinion of the legal advisor has been included in the main case where to find out whether the 'a quo' case is a criminal or civil case, it is necessary to examine the subject matter by presenting evidence at trial, it is not the authority of the exception agency to examine it," said the KPK Public Prosecutor. Wawan Yunarwanto, while reading his response, at the Jakarta Corruption Court, reported by Antara, Monday, August 23.

In the objection note (exception) of RJ Lino which was read on August 16, 2021, RJ Lino and his legal advisors said that the procurement process for 3 QCC Twin Lift Units of PT Pelindo II is a matter that is subject to the scope of a civil case.

"That related to the issue of 'release and discharge', as stated by legal counsel and the defendant himself in his exception material, according to the public prosecutor the granting of 'release and discharge' to the Board of Directors, does not necessarily eliminate the criminal acts committed by the defendant," said the prosecutor.

The reason is that "release and discharge" is only a corporate mechanism where there is no substantive examination of a particular problem, but only a global assessment of the performance of the directors of a company.

The KPK prosecutor also asked the judge to reject the objection of legal adviser RJ Lino.

"We are the Public Prosecutor of the KPK in this case to uphold law and justice and pay attention to the aspirations of the community that are developing based on propriety, hereby requesting the panel of judges to reject all objections/exceptions from legal counsel and defendant Richard Joost Lino alias RJ Lino", said prosecutor Wawan.

Furthermore, the judge was asked to declare that RJ Lino's indictment was valid and fulfilled the requirements and to continue the trial by examining and trying R.J. Lino.

In the indictment, it was stated that PT Pelindo II had made payments to HDHM China as a procurement company for 3 QCC amounting to US$1,142.842.61, even though the maintenance costs for 3 QCC were only US$939,107.08 as the payment from HDHM to PT JPP as a subcontractor for maintenance work. twin lift" QCC.

As a result of RJ Lino's actions, the QCC "twin lift" product was not obtained at a fair price of 13,579,088.71 which was derived from the cost of production of 10,000,262.85 US dollars; reasonable profit margin of 2,553,418.86 US dollars; other costs amounted to 1,025,407 US dollars, and caused an overpriced price of 1,974,911.29 US dollars

For his actions, RJ Lino was subject to Article 2 paragraph (1) or Article 3 of Law Number 31 of 1999 as amended by Law Number 20 of 2001 concerning the Eradication of Criminal Acts of Corruption in conjunction with Article 55 paragraph (1) of the 1st Criminal Code.