Prosecutor 'Ledek' Agus Nurpatra Did Not Dare To Refuse Ferdy Sambo's Order, Different From Bripka RR
JAKARTA - The public prosecutor (JPU) seemed to be teasing the defendant Agus Nurpatra who did not dare to refuse Hendra Kurniawan's orders. In fact, compared to Bripka Ricky Rizal who was able to deny Ferdy Sambo even though the hierarchy of rank was much different."That Bripka Ricky Rizal Wibowo, who in fact is a subordinate who is far below Ferdy Sambo, dared to refuse direct orders to shoot victim Nofriansyah Yosua Hutabarat," said the prosecutor during a trial at the South Jakarta District Court, Monday, February 6.In fact, the difference between Agus Nurpatra's rank, namely Kombes, is not much different from Hendra Kurniawan as Karo Paminal of the Propam Division at that time.Moreover, in a series of incidents, Agus did not feel direct pressure from Ferdy Sambo. In fact, he never even met the former Head of the Propam Division."Moreover, the defendant Agus Nurpatra, who is in the rank of Kombes, the officer who was determined to rank further than Bripka Ricky Rizal and the defendant Agus Nurpatra, did not deal directly with the defendant Ferdy Sambo, so he did not directly feel the pressure or forced force from Sambo," said the prosecutor."Why don't you dare to refuse?," continued the prosecutor.The satire continued when the prosecutor quoted the meaning of the word officer based on the Big Indonesian Dictionary (KBBI) which means manly courage.If referring to the meaning of the officer, then Agus should have been able to enforce the law and violate the odds."Corrupting the meaning of the officer in the KBBI, which means the word ajectiva or the word character that has the bold word, thus the defendant Agus Nurpatra as an officer of pride of the Police, society, and the nation must have the courage to enforce the law of truth, justice and fight against evilness, namely Ferdy Sambo's order," said the prosecutor.Agus Nurpatra in the obstruction of justice case played a role in ordering Irfan Widyanto to take and replace CCTV DVR. In fact, CCTV is one important evidence in the disclosure of the case.In this case, Agus Nurpatra was sentenced to 3 years in prison and a fine of Rp. 20 million. This is because his actions are believed to have violated Article 49 in conjunction with Article 33 of Law Number 19 of 2016 concerning amendments to Law Number 11 of 2008 concerning Information and Electronic Transactions in conjunction with Article 55 paragraph (1) to 1 of the Criminal Code.