Penyidik KPK 2013-2021 Tanggapi Pernyataan Hasto soal Dirinya Tahanan Politik | iNews Room | 14/03

Summary

The first trial of Hasto Kristiyanto, a key figure in the PDIP political party, began in the Jakarta Corruption Court. He is accused of obstructing the investigation into a corruption case involving Harun Masiku, with allegations including bribery and ordering the destruction of evidence. His defense lawyer claims that the charges are politically motivated, suggesting a broader political agenda behind the case. The defense argues that the evidence is weak and circumstantial, while the prosecution maintains that the case is based on solid proof and will unfold openly in court, allowing the truth to be revealed.

Takeaways

• 😀 The first trial of the corruption case involving Harun Masiku and defendant Hasto Kristiyanto took place in the Jakarta Corruption Court today, with the reading of the indictment.
• 😀 Hasto Kristiyanto is accused of obstructing an investigation into Harun Masiku's corruption case, with allegations including paying Rp600 million to Wahyu Setiawan, a member of the 2017-2022 KPU (General Election Commission).
• 😀 Hasto is also accused of instructing Nur Hasan to submerge Harun Masiku's phone in water to obstruct the investigation.
• 😀 Hasto Kristiyanto claims he is a political prisoner, arguing that his indictment is politically motivated, especially in light of statements by Megawati and the political pressure he faced within the PDIP party.
• 😀 Alfon Kurnia Palma, Hasto's lawyer, emphasizes that the case contains many political indications and claims that the legal steps taken against Hasto are forced and lack substantial legal evidence.
• 😀 According to Alfon, the court must first identify who instructed the phone to be submerged before directly accusing Hasto of such an action.
• 😀 Yudi Purnomo, another guest, counters that the charges against Hasto are supported by strong evidence, including witness testimony and other legal documents, which will be presented during the trial.
• 😀 Yudi stresses that if the case were politically motivated, it wouldn't have reached trial, and the facts will be openly examined during the court proceedings.
• 😀 Both Alfon and Yudi agree that the courtroom is where the truth will come out, as all evidence and witness statements can be questioned and examined by both the defense and the prosecution.
• 😀 Alfon argues that political motivations behind the case are clear, suggesting the case is more about political maneuvering than legal justice, and that the use of legal proceedings for political purposes has historical precedence.

Q & A

What are the main charges against Hasto Kristianto in the trial?

Hasto Kristianto is charged with obstruction of justice and bribery. Specifically, he is accused of giving Rp600 million to Wahyu Setiawan, a member of the General Elections Commission (KPU), and obstructing the investigation by ordering the submerging of a phone to hide evidence.

What is the defense's argument regarding the charges against Hasto Kristianto?

The defense, led by Alfon Kurnia Palma, argues that the charges are politically motivated. They believe that Hasto is being criminalized due to his role in the PDIP (Indonesian Democratic Party of Struggle) and that the legal actions against him are being manipulated for political reasons.

How does Alfon Kurnia Palma justify the claim that Hasto is a victim of criminalization?

Alfon points to indications of political manipulation, such as statements from Megawati Soekarnoputri about the future of the PDIP and pressure on Hasto to step down. He argues that the charges against Hasto lack sufficient legal basis and are part of a broader political strategy.

What does Alfon suggest about the evidence related to the submerged phone?

Alfon suggests that the evidence related to the submerged phone is weak. He argues that the prosecution has not conclusively proven who ordered the phone to be submerged and that the connection between Hasto and the act of obstruction is unsubstantiated.

How does Yudi Purnomo, the investigator, respond to the defense’s claims of political motivation?

Yudi Purnomo rejects the claim that the case is politically motivated. He emphasizes that if it were, the case would not have progressed to trial. Yudi insists that the prosecution's evidence is solid and that the legal process is following its due course.

What does Yudi Purnomo say about the role of evidence in the trial?

Yudi stresses that the prosecution’s case is based on witness testimonies, documents, and other pieces of evidence. He believes that the court will evaluate these pieces of evidence openly and transparently during the trial.

What is the significance of the concept of 'political prisoner' in this case?

The concept of 'political prisoner' is significant because Hasto Kristianto's defense team, particularly Alfon Kurnia Palma, uses it to argue that the charges against Hasto are politically driven. The defense suggests that Hasto is being persecuted for his political affiliation, and the term 'political prisoner' is used to highlight this aspect.

How does the defense plan to challenge the prosecution's case?

The defense plans to challenge the prosecution's case by pointing out the lack of concrete evidence connecting Hasto to the alleged crimes. They will focus on the weaknesses in the prosecution's claims, such as the missing link in the evidence regarding the submerged phone.

What does Yudi Purnomo mean when he says the trial will be 'open' and 'transparent'?

Yudi Purnomo means that the trial will allow both the prosecution and defense to present their arguments and evidence openly. He emphasizes that the defense will have the opportunity to cross-examine witnesses, and the judge will assess the credibility of all presented evidence.

How does the trial's outcome depend on the presentation of evidence?

The trial's outcome will depend heavily on the presentation and evaluation of evidence. Both sides must provide compelling evidence, and the judge will decide the verdict based on the sufficiency and credibility of the evidence presented in court.