Mularis Djahri Reports Ditreskrimsus To The National Police Propam

Mularis Djahri. (Photo: Special)

JAKARTA - Mularis Djahri has always been the Commissioner of PT Campang Tiga, asking Propam Polri to supervise and examine alleged irregularities in the investigation process with police report number No. LP/A/216/XI1/2021 Ditreskrimsus Polda Sumsel by Kombes Pol M Barly Ramadhany regarding the determination of the suspect , Arrest and Detention of Alleged Criminal Acts Article 107 in conjunction with Article 55 of the Plantation Law, and Alleged Crime of Article 5 of the Money Laundering Law.

In the police report, Mularis was accused of illegally working, using, occupying, and/or controlling plantation land in the sugarcane plantation area of PT Laju Perdana Indah (LPI) in Cempaka District, East OKU, South Sumatra.

He explained that PT Campang Tiga is the legal holder of a location permit for an oil palm plantation covering an area of 12,000 hectares in Campang Tiga Ilir Village, based on the Regent's Decree Number: 232/KPTS/693/1/2004 Year 2004, and an extension on December 6, 2007.

"While PT LPI, according to investigators in the model A report, is the owner of the land, in fact PT Laju Perdana Indah does not have a location permit in Campang Tiga Ilir Village," Mularis said in his letter, quoted on Sunday 17 August.

PT Campang Tiga, continued Mularis, has carried out the company's obligations, one of which is providing compensation to the local community by means of relinquishing rights which is authentic evidence that there has been a legal transfer by consensus agreement between PT Campang Tiga and the community who owns the land in Campang Tiga Village. llir, Cempaka District, Ogan Komering Ulu Regency, East.

"Commissioner Pol M Barly Ramadhany as an investigator named me a suspect when I was present in the investigation process as a witness, and was immediately declared a perpetrator of a criminal act for the incident, and determined me as a suspect and continued with arrest and detention in less than 12 hours. without showing and explaining the objective or subjective reasons for the arrest and detention," said Mularis.

"While there is no evidence in the investigation examination process that has anything to do with the elements as referred to in Article 107 letter a Jo Article 55 of the Plantation Law in conjunction with Article 65 paragraph (1) of the Criminal Code in conjunction with Article 3 of the Money Laundering Law. , he added.

In addition, Mularis also objected because investigators named his son, Hendra Saputra as a suspect in less than 12 hours, which was followed by arrests and detentions.

"It can be suspected that the investigator will continue to be unprofessional in carrying out investigations, irregularities and abuse of authority," he said.