JAKARTA, IFN - Application pretrial filed by the former Minister of Religious Affairs Suryadharma Ali rejected entirely by a single judge Tatik Hadiyanti.
"The judge argued that the determination of the validity of the suspect is not the domain of the applicant's pre-trial so that application rejected in its entirety and the applicant charged case was nil," he said while reading the verdict in the South Jakarta District Court on Wednesday.
Such decision is based on Article 1 Paragraph 10 Code of Criminal Procedure Law (Criminal Code) in conjunction with Article 77 in conjunction with Article 82 paragraph 1 letter d that are very limitedly provides that the determination of the suspect was not including pretrial object.
Associated with the determination of Suryadharma Ali as a suspect who assessed the Suyadharma Ali as forceful measures, Tatik argues that the determination of the suspect is not a requirement but rather a forced attempt to employ forceful measures in the form of arrest, detention, confiscation, and searches.
In addition, the problem whether or not the loss of the state as evidence demanded by the attorney Suryadharma Ali, according to Tati, the case has entered the main substance that is not the authority of pretrial agencies.
"The presence or absence of preliminary evidence of at least two valid evidence has entered the main substance of the evidence that the case is not authority pretrial agencies," he said.
KPK set Suryadharma Ali as suspect cases of corruption in the Ministry of Religious pilgrimage implementation period 2012-2013.
He applied for a pretrial order the judge stated warrant the commencement of the investigation (sprindik) Sprin.Dik number-27/01/05/2014 and Sprin.Dik-27A / 01/12/2014 is not valid and is not based on law.
Besides, he also begged the judge stated determination of the suspect, the investigation process, and further action related to an investigation conducted the Commission is invalid.
In the suit material, Suryadharma questioning authority of the Commission in dealing with corruption in accordance with Article 11, paragraph a law on the Corruption Eradication Commission.
Suryadharma Ali also requires the Commission to pay compensation Rp1 trillion for establishing himself as a suspect.
Legal counsel argued, the Commission does not qualify Suryadharma case because the state has not found a loss of at least 1 billion of cases involving Suryadharma.
In addition, the power law also considers the implementation of the Hajj corruption case in 2010-2013 "is not a concern of society."
Comments
Post a Comment