Mustofa, The Perpetrator Of The Shooting At The MUI Office, Has Committed A Crime In Lampung

The Central Jakarta Menteng MUI Office is guarded by Brimob units after the shooting/ Photo; Jehan/VOI

JAKARTA - Mustofa, the shooter at the Indonesian Ulema Council (MUI) office, was recorded as having committed a crime in 2016. This was conveyed directly by the Head of Public Relations of the Lampung Police, Kombes Pol Zahwani Pandra Arsyad.

"Yes, from the database that Kamj received on behalf of Mustofa NR, there was a criminal record, he had committed an act. The crime of vandalism in one of the vital installations or vital objects, was at the Lampung Prov DPRD Office in 2016.

Pandra also revealed that Mustofa, who had been charged with Article 406 of the Criminal Code regarding vandalism, also claimed to be the guardian of the Prophet Muhammad SAW.

"Then, that is what is suspected in the indictment of Article 406 of the Criminal Code regarding vandalism and he always claims that he is the representative of the Prophet Muhammad SAW and has been prosecuted by the Public Prosecutor for 5 months", he added.

Previously, Deputy Chairman of the Indonesian Ulema Council (MUI) Anwar Abbas said that at the time of the incident, the shooting at the MUI office, he was holding a meeting with his colleagues. However, he received information that he had a person who should be suspected.

"We are in a meeting, so if there is information according to the officer, this person claims to be a prophet. And he has come here twice to meet with the Head of MUI", Anwar Abbas told reporters, Tuesday, April 2.

Abbas also said that the shooting occurred before the perpetrator entered the elevator to meet the Head of MUI. However, it was prevented. And it is known that the weapon used by the perpetrator is an air softgun type.

Before he entered the elevator, it was a shooting. The weapon, the air softgun, yes. But there is a shell. So this has entered the criminal realm, threatening people's lives."

Abbas hopes that the police will thoroughly investigate the shooting case.

MUI gave it all to the police. What is clear is that there was an employee who was injured on his back. The second is that the glass on the back was broken. There were two versions, because the shot or yes because the glass was broken. It is suspected that because an employee ran away, his hand was injured, he had been sewn, 10 stitches. Beber Abbas.