In the verdict read in the South Jakarta District Court on Monday (16/02/2015), the judge considers a request Sarpin legal team Budi Gunawan included in pretrial object. Budi parties questioned the establishment as a suspect by the KPK.
Commission set Budi as a suspect in a case of alleged corruption in the form of the acceptance of gifts or promises during his tenure as Head of Career Development Bureau (Karobinkar) Human Resources Deputy Police 2003-2006 and other positions in the police.
Article 11 of Law No. 30 of 2002 on the Commission set up a number of things that the authority of the Commission. Mentioned, the Commission is authorized to conduct an inquiry, investigation, and prosecution of corruption cases involving law enforcement officials, state officials, and others in connection with corruption offenses committed by law enforcement officers or state officials.
In addition, a case that received attention plaguing the society as well as cases involving state losses of at least $ 1 billion.
According Sarpin, Karobinkar an administrative position and not law enforcement. In addition, when the alleged cases occurred, Budi not the organizers of the country because it was still class echelon II A.
Judge considers that the public does not know Budi while still serving Karobinkar. Public, he said, are new to the respective Budi since decided to become a candidate head of the Police by President Joko Widodo.
The day after that, the applicant named as a suspect by the Commission so that the classification of public attention as referred to Article 11, paragraph b of Law Commission are not met.
There is no loss of state
Judge Sarpin also considers the case that ensnared Budi not harm the state. Judge refers to warrant investigation (sprindik) dated January 12, 2015, the contents Budi suspected of corruption together in the form of a gift receipt.
"Considering that the act of receiving a gift or promise not associated with losses to the state because of the actions related to the abuse of power and authority. As such, what allegedly committed by the applicant (John) did not cause losses to the state. So that the qualification in Article Law Commission was not proved , "said Sarpin.
Over all these considerations, the judge considers the case Budi Sarpin not subject to the law of the perpetrators of corruption under the authority of the Commission to conduct an inquiry, investigation, and prosecution.
"So, the Commission investigation conducted unauthorized and unlawful. Determination quo (the suspect) is not a bona fide binding legal force," said Sarpin.
No comments:
Post a Comment