Kasus Kabareskrim: Mabes Polri Ungkap Kesalahan Susno

JAKARTA (Lampost): Tudingan pelanggaran Kepala Badan Reserse dan Kriminal (Kabareskrim) Polri Komjen Susno Duadji makin jelas. Mabes Polri mempertegas kebenaran adanya pertemuan Susno dengan buron Komisi Pemberantasan Korupsi (KPK) Anggoro Widjaja.

Tim kuasa hukum pimpinan KPK menilai bukti pertemuan Susno dan Anggoro dipertegas oleh pernyataan polisi. Namun, polisi berdalih pertemuan itu dalam rangka pemeriksaan oleh Kabareskrim terhadap bos PT Masaro Radiokom yang terjerat kasus suap pengadaan Sistem Komunikasi Radio Terpadu (SKRT) di Departemen Kehutanan. Polisi menyebutkan, saat pertemuan itu status Anggoro sudah sebagai saksi.

Salah seorang tim kuasa hukum dua pimpinan nonaktif KPK Bibit Samad Riyanto dan Chandra Hamzah, Bambang Widjojanto, menegaskan saat pertemuan dilakukan status Anggoro belum menjadi saksi.

"Kalau Pak Nanan (Kadiv Humas Mabes Polri, red) bilang Pak SD bertemu Anggoro dalam kapasitasnya memeriksa saksi, itu salah. Karena waktu itu Anggoro belum ditetapkan sebagai saksi," kata Bambang Widjojanto di Gedung KPK, kemarin.

Menurut Bambang, Anggoro baru ditetapkan sebagai saksi oleh polisi pada Agustus 2009. Hal itu berkaitan dengan dugaan suap pimpinan KPK. Sedangkan pertemuan Susno dengan Anggoro dilakukan pada 10 Juli 2009, atau tiga hari setelah KPK menyatakan Anggoro sebagai buron.

Sementara KPK menetapkan Anggoro tersangka sejak 19 Juni 2009. Keterlibatan Anggoro diketahui dalam persidangan kasus suap proyek Tanjung Api-Api dengan terdakwa Yusuf Erwin Faishal. Dalam persidangan, Yusuf Erwin didakwa menerima uang Rp125 juta dan 220 ribu dolar AS.

"Jadi, kalau kita ikuti logika Pak Nanan, pertanyaan mendasarnya menetapkan orang sebagai saksi kok enggak diperiksa? Malah saksinya kabur. Masuk akal enggak?" kata Bambang.

Sementara itu, Ahmad Rifai, kuasa hukum Bibit dan Chandra lainnya, mengemukakan pernyataan Nanan mengenai pertemuan Susno dan Anggoro justru mempertegas bukti bahwa Susno memang menemui Anggoro. "Ini menunjukkan sudah layak diproses." n MI/U-3

Sumber: Lampung Post

Foto: Hukumonline

Many cases under Susno dropped

The Jakarta Post , Jakarta Wed, 10/14/2009 10:38 AM Headlines

Activists have accused the National Police of intentionally burying major cases, particularly graft-related, under chief detective Comr. Gen. Susno Duadji, saying they have criminalized graft fighters instead.

"We have recorded a number of unresolved graft cases handled by the Bareskrim [criminal detective body]. Those cases are far more important for the public, rather than naming activists as libel suspects or former anti-graft body deputies as suspects in the alleged abuse of power," Emerson Yuntho of the Indonesia Corruption Watch told The Jakarta Post on Tuesday.

Media reports have recorded dozens of major cases that are unresolved or were dropped by the Bareskrim in the past year.

In March, Susno took over the investigation into the voter list fraud case during the East Java 2008 gubernatorial election from the East Java Police. The takeover of the case took place shortly after Soekarwo, nominated by President Susilo Bambang Yudhoyono's Democratic Party, was sworn in as the new governor on Feb. 12, 2009.

The case, which implicated the provincial polling body's former chairman, was investigated by local police and following a legal complaint by Soekarwo's rival Khofifah Indar Parawansa, nominated by the United Development Party (PPP) and former president Megawati Soekarnoputri's Indonesian Democratic Party of Struggle (PDI-P).

The takeover of the case was followed by the replacement of Insp. Gen. Herman Surjadi Sumawiredja by Brig. Gen. Anton Bachrul Alam as East Java police chief.

Protesting the national unit’s intervention, Herman then filed a resignation letter to the National Police, declaring interference "from a higher position" as the main reason for his departure.

Last October, the Bareskrim extended its investigations to include a graft allegation in connection with the purchase of Zatapi crude oil involving the state oil and gas firm PT Pertamina, local companies said to be close to the Presidential Palace and to Singapore-based oil importer PT Gold Manor International.

The police named four Pertamina officials and a director of Gold Manor as suspects but did not detain them. The suspects’ names have also never been announced publicly and the case was subsequently closed.

The then National Police chief Gen. Sutanto was appointed as Pertamina chief commissioner in January while the graft case was still in progress. He was also included in the SBY-Boediono campaign team in the recent presidential election.

Susno’s squad, in March, carried out an investigation into the US$197.5 million Indover bank scandal but many sources have claimed the case has already been dropped.

Indonesian Police Watch coordinator Neta S. Pane said police had no choice but to clarify the status of unresolved cases to the public.

"Otherwise, the public may question their professionalism. The police may also lose the public trust," he said.

National Police spokesman Sr. Comr. I Ketut Untung Yoga Ana could not explain the main reasons behind the dropped cases and the halted investigations into others.

"I don’t know the details of each case. Detectives must have explanations on the progress of investigations into these cases," he said. (bbs)

Unresolved cases:
2008: Zatapi scandal
2009: Indover bank scandal
2005: Police's 15 problem bank accounts

Closed cases:
2008: voter roll fraud in East Java
2008: 13 illegal logging cases in Riau

Sumber: The Jakarta Post

Double standards of Indonesian police

By Answer C. Styannes

Jakarta, Indonesia — Two vice chairmen of Indonesia’s Corruption Eradication Commission are under police investigation for alleged abuse of authority. Yet lawyers and activists have widely criticized the investigation of Chandra M. Hamzah and Bibit Samad Riyanto, suggesting the two are being persecuted because the police hope to weaken the commission and undermine its effective anti-corruption efforts.

Rivalry between the two law enforcement institutions surfaced in July 2009, when the commission began investigating the national police’s chief detective, Commissioner General Susno Duaji, for allegedly using his power to force Bank Century to return a large amount of deposited funds to their owner unlawfully. In return, it is alleged, Duaji received 10 billion rupiah (US$1.06 million).

The commission’s investigation of Duaji is widely believed to have triggered the police investigation into the alleged abuse of power by the two commissioners. This view is strengthened by the fact that the police charge was inconsistent and apparently fabricated – the police first said that the commissioners were involved in bribery but later said it was abuse of power.

This lack of professionalism is not new among Indonesia’s police. In this case the police reprisal against the anti-corruption commission was on the national level, but such behavior also prevails at the grassroots level.

For example, a case came to light recently in which an underage girl was raped by a 40-year-old man. Her family filed a complaint with the Jakarta police, but no proper inquiry was conducted. Worse, after her family found the perpetrator and brought him to the police station, instead of detaining him the police released him, citing lack of evidence.

In cases such as torture and other police abuses, victims are often reluctant to complain to the police because they are asked to provide witnesses and other evidence. As police torture and abuses take place in a closed setting, it is hard to fulfill such requirements.

The only witnesses in a torture case are the police officers themselves. It would be rare for an officer to testify against his colleagues and support the victim’s complaint.

The police are guilty of negligence in some cases, and abuse of power in others, as is evident from the different handling of the cases involving the commissioners and the young rape victim. While the police acted swiftly to investigate the commissioners, they neglected their duty concerning the young girl.

These are common problems reflecting the lack of professionalism within Indonesia’s police force. The police often fail in their duty. When they are supposed to respond quickly, they are often overly cautious. And when conditions require that they react with care, rash measures are taken.

Professionalism in the police force is important, as it is closely related to human rights enforcement. It is a police obligation to protect human rights. An unprofessional police force can impede people’s access to justice, as it is the only institution with the authority to handle almost all criminal cases.

Furthermore, instead of implementing their slogan "to serve and protect," Indonesia’s police have caused distrust in people about law enforcement. As a famous cynical saying goes, "Complaining to the police about your lost chicken will only cause you to lose your goat." This describes the state of policing in Indonesia.

Distrust toward the police can lead to social unrest if people start taking the law into their own hands, as was seen recently in Pelalawan, Pekanbaru when angry residents attacked a red light district, smashing property and setting fire to buildings.

If the police could so hastily launch an investigation into the two commissioners who threatened them, they should be able to quickly launch their own internal reforms, as misconduct within the force in the long term is a much bigger threat to the cause of law enforcement they are pledged to protect.
--
(Answer C. Styannes is a research associate at the Community Legal Aid Institute in Jakarta, Indonesia. She is currently studying in the Faculty of Law at the University of Indonesia, majoring in constitutional law. Her work focuses on issues of constitutional law, judicial and legislative reforms, labor laws, and civil and political rights).


Sumber: UPI Asia.com