•    HOME   
•    NEWS   
•    BUSINESS   
•    INTERNATIONAL   
•    TECH   
•    SPORTS   
•    LIFE & TIMES   
•    OPINION   
•    MY JAKARTA   
•    BLOGS   

Even though Indonesian prosecutors are renowned for using the defendants’ refusal to admit guilt as a factor to recommend heavier sentences, it came as a surprise to even the most cynical when prosecutors demanded the death sentence for Antasari Azhar, the former anticorruption boss who had once led the South Jakarta Prosecutors’ Office.

“The defendant was a law enforcer. Besides, we earlier requested life sentences for the accused accomplices. What else could we recommend for the accused mastermind?” Attorney General Hendarman Supandji told members of the House of Representatives’ commission on legal affairs. He was responding to questions why prosecutors had no clear standard in their sentencing demands.

Since the trial began, prosecutors have not shied away from letting the public know how they felt about Antasari, particularly after he led graft investigations that put one of their own, senior AGO prosecutor Urip Tri Gunawan, in jail over a bribery scandal.

“Since the trial began, he has been denying the crime that we prosecutors fully believe he has committed,” Hendarman said.

He added that the demand had been prepared by the South Jakarta Prosecutor’s Office.

“The prosecution demand had been prepared following input given by prosecutors following the case and input from their superiors,” Hendarman said.

“Several of the prosecutors are the former subordinates of Antasari. They wouldn’t have demanded capital punishment if they had not firmly believed he was guilty.”

Lawmaker Dewi Asmara from the Golkar Party questioned Hendarman about the requirements to support the death sentence demand, as she alleged the “like and dislike” factors in play given that Antasari once led the antigraft agency to uncover a humiliating bribery scandal at the AGO, where he had served for more than 20 years.

“Antasari is facing the death sentence, whereas prosecutors only demanded one-and-a-half years for fellow prosecutor Esther [Thanak] for stealing [over 300] ecstasy pills while another drug crime defendant in West Jakarta is facing four years in jail for selling just one pill,” Dewi said atthe hearing. “I am wondering if the AGO has any standards when preparing the sentencing demand.” Without solid standards, she said, sentencing requests could be open to corruption.

Eddy Sitanggang from the Democratic Party told Hendarman that prosecutors in the past sought only 15 years in jail for Hutomo “Tommy” Mandala Putra for ordering the murder of a judge, while his accomplices were sentenced to life.

Another lawmaker criticized the tireless efforts by prosecutors to pursue a libel conviction of Prita Mulyasari, telling him “why don’t you just forget Prita and get serious about capturing real criminals?”

But the chief prosecutor denied any discriminatory approach for sentencing demands, insisting that his office was guided by the “equality before the law” principle.

Hendarman said Esther, who is currently serving a one-year jail term and is facing permanent dismissal from the AGO, had breached procedures by handing ecstasy pills from the evidence locker to a police officer, but she had no intention of selling them.

As for Prita, “she might have been the victim of malpractice at Omni [International Hospital], but when she insulted the hospital via Facebook, it was Omni who fell victim to her,” he said.