Tag: Prosecutor

Response to Prosecutor’s exception in trial of KNPB TImika six

Apologies for the delay in translation and posting.

via KNPBNews

https://i0.wp.com/knpbnews.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/02/DSC008101.jpg
Head KNPB Timika Region, Steven Itlay

On Thursday 28th Feburary 2013 at 11.oo o’clock Papuan time the third session of responses to the Public Prosecutor was held regarding the Legal Council’s Letter of Exception from the 14th February 2013.

In the Letter of Exception, concerning the indictment read by the Legal Council, there was the following:

1.            1. Procedures were undertaken without compliance to regulations set out by KUHAP (the law code of criminal procedure), with the consequence that the investigation conducted with the publication of the Prosecution’s Indictment Letter is invalid.

2.           The indictment letter by the brother of the Public Prosecutor isn’t accurate, isn’t clear and doesn’t comprehensively state the charges against the defendant.

3.           The actions of the defendants can be categorised as criminal offences intended in the first indictment:

  • Article 2, Paragraph (1) Emergency Act 12 (1951)
  • Article 55, Paragraph (1) The first KUHAP and/or the second indictment
  • Article 106, KUHP (Indonesian Criminal Code)
  • Article 55, Paragraph 1 (the first)

4.           It states the process of the investigation into the defendant is flawed.

5.           It states the letter of indictment is not clear, accurate or complete.

6.           It states the criminal actions of the defendant are not in fact criminal actions as included in the Indictment: Article 2 paragraph (1) Emergency Law 12, 1951. Article 55 paragraph (1) the Criminal Code (KUHP) and/or Indictment 2 : Article 106 Criminal Code (KUHP). Article 55 paragraph (1) Ke-1

7.          It states ‘null and void’ or at the very least, cannot receive the indictment letter by the Public Prosecutor numbered Reg.PDM-02/TMK/Ep.2/01/2013 from the 17th January 2013.

8.   Releasing the defendant of all charges and lawsuits.

9.            Freeing the defendant from custody and reinstating the defendant’s good name. But, the Public Prosecutor’s brother is Andita.

Riskianto, SH rejected the Exception Letter by the Legal Counsel and requested that the Timika District Court have the power to investigate and prosecute this case. A further hearing will be held on Thursday 7th March, 2013.

Meanwhile, Legal Counsel Ivonia Tecjuri told reporters and family that the exception wouldn’t be changed. “We’re keeping the original exception,” she said.

https://i0.wp.com/knpbnews.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/02/DSC00869.jpg
Steven Itlay being led to caught by armed police (photo: KNPBNews.com)
https://i0.wp.com/knpbnews.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/02/DSC00807.jpg
Indonesian police have show of force in treason trial (Photo: KNPBNews.com)
https://i0.wp.com/knpbnews.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/02/DSC00891.jpg
Legal Counsel, Ms. Ivonia Tecjuari, SH memberika press conference after the hearing (Photo: KNPBNews.com)
Related articles

 

2

Lawyer calls on judges to release Buchtar after all witnesses fail to appear

 

Bintang Papua,
11 September 2012
Jayapura: Gustaf Kawer, one of the lawyers defending the former chairman of the KNPB – National Committee of West Papua – said that the judges hearing the case of Buchtar Tabuni should have the courage to release the defendant  in the absence of any witnesses to testify against him. The lawyer said this followed the decision yesterday to postpone a further hearing in the trial.He said that from the start, he had commented that the the prosecutor in the case had shown no seriousness in handling the case against Buchtar. This is evident from the fact that none of the witnesses he had wanted to testify at the trial had appeared although several hearings had been held.

‘In the latest instance, the witness Matius Murib was to have appeared but he didn’t appear, even though he is known to be in Jayapura and his home address in known, so why  did he not appear?’

The lawyer   said Matius Murib is known to be well acquainted with the case and the judges should consider that if there is no evidence to prove that Buchter was responsible for damaging the  prison in any way, which was to have been proven by the witnesses all of whom had failed to appear, then the judges should take the bold  step of simply  releasing the man who is now on trial.

The lawyer also spoke about the many shootings  that have been occurring in the city of Jayapura  which have been linked to Buchtar, which was nothing more than a set-up. He said that Buchtar had been linked to the shooting of Miron Wetipo but that case has already been solved, so it was clear that the authorities were trying to make a scapegoat of Buchtar. Buchtar was arrested on 6 June 2012 which was just at the time when some shootings occurred in Jayapura which was followed by the arrest of Buchtar, whereas Buchtar was not in any way connected with those shootings. So instead of being charged with the shootings, he now faces the charge  of inflicting damage on the Abepura Prison in 2010, which means that he should have been arrested in 2010.

At the time, it was said that there were plenty of witnesses and now they were not even able to call Matius Murib as a witness.

The lawyer said that  the panel of judges should postpone further hearings until Matius Murib could be called as his testimony would be crucial for this trial. Gustaf insisted that there were plenty of witnesses who could give testimony regarding the damage inflicted on the prison, yet the prosecutors were not able to  get any of these witnesses to appear.

As is known, the hearing on 10 September was again postponed .

At the hearing held yesterday, the prosecutors were still not able to bring any witnesses to court.who would be able to testify about Buchtar’s alleged damage to the prison. The prosecutors has also been unable to summon Liberty Sitinjak who would have been a key witness  about the incident on 3 December 2010.

The prosecutor announced that Liberty was unable to appear to testify, even though he has been summoned three times. And now, the hearing held on 10 September was also suspended until 13 September while it was being said that Matius Murib, who was formerly and member of the National Human Rights Commission, would also not be able to  appear.

It has now been announced that the hearing that is due to take place on 13 September which was originally intended  to hear testimony from witnesses would now be devoted to questioning the defendant, Buchtar Tabuni.

[Translated by Carmel Budiardjo]

Related articles

 

0

Forkorus’ eye problems not properly dealt with

JUBI, 18 April, 2012
Forkorus Yaboisembut, one of five Papuan activists who was recently sentenced to three years for his participation in the Papuan People’s Congress held last October, is now known to be suffering from eye problems.This was stated by Olga Hamadi, a member of the team of lawyers who have been defending Forkorus and his four co-defendants.

‘Forkorus complained about his eye problems  when we paid him a visit last week,’ said Olga Hamadi, and added that he was not getting proper treatment for the problem. ‘I was taken to the polyclinic but the treatment I had there was not satisfactory,’ Forkorus told his lawyer.

The Dewan Adat Papua – Papuan Customary Council of which Forkorus is the chairperson said that they too have reported the problem to the authorities at the Abepura Prison where Forkorus is being held. Forkorus has also sent a letter about the problem to  the High Court in Jayapura.’ His lawyer said that Forkorus had asked for their help to submit his letter to the High Court.

According to Olga Hamadi, the eye problem is not too severe and Forkorus is otherwise in good health.

Related articles
0

Forkorus is waiting for international support: Verdict to be announced on 16 March

Bintang Papua, 12 March 2012<Illustration at the beginning of the report shows the defendants addressing their sympathisers outside the court.>

The  twelfth hearing of the trial of the five defendants – Forkorus Yaboisembut (‘President of the Federal Republic of West Papua), Edison Waromi (‘prime minister’). Agustinus M Sanany Kraar, Selpius Bobii, and Dominikus Sorabut – was held in the Jayapura district court on 12 March. As had happened at the time of previous hearings,  a large crowd had gathered along the Abepura highway, causing a traffic jam around the courthouse, because of the presence of security force people who were also trying to regulate the traffic.

The defendants also stuck to their routine of saying prayers before the hearing and as well as giving speeches afterwards.

After the hearing concluded, Forkorus and his co-defendants  left the courthose while singing hymns making speeches in which they said that  reject the trial and reject the whole process of charging them with makar – treason. They also said that what they wanted was their unconditional release and they were now awaiting  responses from international lawyers who they had approached for international support. They said that none of the charges against  them were true but were the result of manipulations.

At 8.51 local time, the five defendants arrived at the Jayapura courthouse and as they got down from the coach, they sang hymns together with their supporters and  members of their families for fifteen minutes. This slightly delayed the start of the hearing.

At 9.05, the panel of judges consisting of  five people took their positions on the bench along with two secretaries.

The chairman of the panel of judges had to delay the start of the hearing briefly  because the chief prosecutor had not yet arrived.

This session was held to hear the response by the prosecutor – replik – to the defence statement by the defendants as well as by their legal team.

The chief prosecutor, Julius Teuf said that they firmly rejected the defence statement  as well as the statements made by each of the defendants.Teuf then said that they stood by their earlier  demand that the five defendants should be sentenced to five years imprisonment.

Freddy Latunussa, an expert member of the defence legal team, said that the statement by the chief prosecutor that the defendants had tried, called upon and urged  others to take part in an act of treason  had not been proven under Article  106 of the Criminal Code as had been alleged by the prosecution.

According to the observations of Bintang Papua, the defence team of lawyers  rejected all the demands  made against the defendants as stated in the Replik because the Criminal Code does not allow statements to be read out but should have been presented in writing. As the panel of judges had previously said that this should have been done in writing, the chairman of the panel said that they had given the prosecutors three days to do this in accordance with an agreement reached during a previous hearing.

A 9.20, the chairman of the panel of judges closed the hearing  and said that the trial would continue on Friday, 16 March, when the panel of judges would announce their verdict.

Related articles
0

Stop criminalising lawyers and human rights activists in makar cases

JUBI, 5 March 2012
Chairman of the Garda KPP P Bovit Bofra (Jubi / Arjuna)

 

Bearing in mind the continual terrorising of defence lawyers during the makar (treason) trial  [now under way in Jayapura] and  of human rights activists as well as journalists covering the trial, the central executive of GARDA-P , the Movement for People’s Democracy has called upon the security forces to put an end to all of their attempts to silence these people.

In a press release issued by GARDA-P on 5 March, it called for an end to the criminalisation of the lawyers defending Forkorus Yabisembut and his four co-defendants. They also urged the Indonesian government to  dismiss the head of the Public Prosecutors Office, Julius D Teuf, SH and replace him because he has been deliberately attempting to criminalise the defence team of Forkorus and his co-defendants.

‘We also call on the prosecutors to stop their questioning during which they have made offensive and insulting remarks  about the defendants and also about the Papuan people during the trial.We call for the unconditional release of the defendants and for an end to all the violence and  prohibitions  against journalists wanting to report the trial hearings because the trial is being held in public.’

GARDA-P said that during makar trials in Papua, the defence lawyers  are always being subjected to threats and terror by the security forces because they are defending persons who are being charged with makar.

Not only the lawyers but also the judges  are threatened and subjected  to interruptions, to ensure that the hearings comply with the interests of the state. Not only that, but also the bags of the defence lawyers are searched  before they enter the court.for the trial of Forkorus and his co-defendants.

GARDA-P  also said that the police on duty frequently carry weapons outside the courthouse in order to terrorise the defendants and their lawyers. and seek to threaten journalists who are reporting the trial which is open to the public.

GARDA-P regards these actions as being attempts to influence the court proceedings  in order to ensure that the police and the prosecutors make heavier demands for those facing  makar charges.

‘During the hearing on 24 February, while witnesses were being questioned, the prosecutor was constantly interrupting the questioning which greatly angered the defence lawyer, Gustaf Kawar, with the prosecutor now seeking to exclude Gustaf Kawar from the defence team. Such actions are an attempt to cause division (among the lawyers) and to make things more difficult for the defendants.’

Related articles
0

Create a website or blog at WordPress.com

Up ↑

%d bloggers like this: