Comissioner Johny Nelson Simanjuntak came to Bali as one of the speakers in Public Examination of The Supreme Courtâ€™s decision to overturn South Jakarta District Courtâ€™s acquittal of Anand Krishna from any criminal charges last November.
â€œI come to Bali to observe the public opinion about this case and investigate whether there is constitutional and human rights that have been breached in this case. If there is, we can use international forum to settle it,â€ he said during the examination.
The Public Examination was held in postgraduate building of Udayana University on Oct 25, 2012 in Denpasar Bali. An Expert on Constitutional Law and former Constitutional Court Judge, Dr Dewa Gede Palguna SH MH and an expert on Criminal Law, Dr IB Surya Jaya Dharma SH MH were also speakers in the public examination of this controversial case of Anand Krishna.
Dr Palguna stated assertively that an acquitted verdict could not be appealed according to article 67 of Indonesian Criminal Code Procedure because it would clearly violate the Article 28D (1) of the 1945 Indonesian Constitution stipulating that every person shall have the right of recognition, guarantee, protection, certainty before a just law, and of equal treatment before the law.
â€œWhen someone was dismissed of all criminal charges and reinstated his civil rights by the court, no appeal could be taken without breaching his/her constitutional rights. The appeal of the acquittal was also clearly violating the Article 67 of Indonesian Criminal Code Procedure,â€ said Dr Palguna.
According to him, article 67 states that an accused or public prosecutor shall have the right to appeal against a judgment of a court of first instance except against a judgment of acquittal, a dismissal of all charges which relates to a matter of the inappropriate application of law and a judgment under express procedures.
Meanwhile, Dr Surya Jaya Dharma found out a lot of irregularities and unlawful procedures concerning this case.
The public examination of this case was also held last week (18/10) in University of Gajah Mada (UGM), Jogjakarta that was attend by Professor at Criminal Law of Diponegoro University - Semarang Prof Dr. Nyoman Serikat Putra Jaya SH MH, Professor at Criminal Law of UGM Prof Dr. Edward OS Hiariej SH Mhum, and Advocate Nur Ismanto SH Msi as speakers.
Both Prof Putra Jaya dan Prof Hiariej agreed that the appeal of the acquittal was unlawful according to article 67 and 244 Criminal Code Procedure.
According to them, article 244 stipulates that an accused or public prosecutor may lodge a request for an examination in cassation to the Supreme Court with regard to a judgment in a criminal case rendered at last resort by a court other than the Supreme Court, except with regard to an acquittal.
They also could not think enough why Anand has been unlawfully mistreated, and violated his rights from the case being handled by the police until the supreme court through many irregularities and illegal procedures. They also said, it looked like the law trying to punish Anand right from the begining, instead of delivering justice.
Advocate Association Chief of Jogjakarta, Nur Ismanto, understood and truly supported Anandâ€™s stand to fight this unlawful and unconstitutional verdict until justice is served.
The support is in conjunction to the message for 2012 of United Nation Secretary-General in relying on the help of concerned friends and supporters such as scholars, religious leaders, philantropists, human right experts, etc to carry out the global mission to deliver justice and keep pace across the spectrum of activities such as peace, development, human rights, the rule of law, the empowerment of the worldâ€™s women and youth.
Anand has been one of the front-runners in pursuing the global interfaith harmony in Indonesia that many threats have addressed against him ever since, to silence his voice and stop his movement. The threat against him was also being confirmed by one of the senior journalists in Bali since 2006.
Meantime, according to Anand, the official organ of radical Islamists, Suara Islam (Voice of Islam) regretted the move by the Human Rights Commissioner. Anand said, this media has been talking against him and criticising his pluralist and all inclusive activities and writings. He also said, another notorious islamic group, known as, Front of Islamic Defender (FPI) was present at the court during the trial to defame him. (Press Release/Hadi Susanto/I018/T007)