The legal advisor for the defendant, Strong Ma'ruf, assessed that the indictment of the Public Prosecutor (JPU) did not explain the actions of his client which was deemed to support or violate criminal acts. Thus, the dakwan is called not clemat and must be null and void by law.
"In the description of the events and actions committed by the defendant in the indictment, there is no explanation of the facts that explain the complete and clear role of the defendant in the crime," said Strong legal advisor Ma'ruf during a trial at the South Jakarta District Court, Thursday, October 20.
In addition, the prosecutor's indictment is also considered wrong, especially regarding the series of events. This is because the chronology of events in the indictment is considered null and void.
Especially in the Strong Ma'ruf section, which is said to have been aware of the plan to eradicate the life of Nopriansyah Yosua Hutabarat alias Brigadier J.
"The public prosecutor never explained when, where and from whom the defendant was Strong Ma'ruf knew of the plan or intention to take the life of Nopriansyah Yousa Hutabarat," said the prosecutor.
Then, the indictment did not clearly explain the incident that occurred in Magelang. So, Ma'ruf's reason for carrying a knife from Magelang to Jakarta was not disclosed.
"The reason for the defendant, Strong Ma'ruf, carrying a fruit knife will certainly be clear if the public prosecutor's indictment is careful, clear, and complete," said the prosecutor.
For information, Strong Ma'ruf is said to have participated in assisting the residents of Brigadier J's plan.
Thus, in that case he was charged with violating Article 340 subsidiary Article 338 in conjunction with Article 55 paragraph 1 1 of the Criminal Code.
The English, Chinese, Japanese, Arabic, and French versions are automatically generated by the AI. So there may still be inaccuracies in translating, please always see Indonesian as our main language. (system supported by DigitalSiber.id)
