Chief of Police: The Case of SK Budiardjo & Nurlela, Criminalized by Agung Sedayu Without Scientific Evidence, Still Proceeded to Imprisonment. Is a Re-investigation Needed?
Difficulté
Facile
Durée
24 mois
Catégories
Art
Coût
5 USD ($)
Introduction
In a recent speech, Police Chief General Listyo Sigit Prabowo highlighted the importance of handling cases through scientific crime investigation. He referenced the murder case of Doctor Mawartih in Papua, where DNA sample testing led to the successful identification of the perpetrator. In contrast, the murder cases of Vina and Eky in Cirebon in 2016 lacked such scientific backing, leading to widespread public perception of potential intimidation of the suspects, wrongful arrests, and the removal of two wanted individuals from the list of suspects.
However, while the Police Chief emphasized the significance of scientific crime investigation, his words seem to have been disregarded in many cases. One such example is the case of SK Budiardjo and Nurlela, whose land ownership documents were allegedly falsified without any forensic testing to substantiate these claims. Yet, despite the lack of scientific evidence, the case was still brought to trial, resulting in a prison sentence.
The Case of SK Budiardjo & Nurlela
SK Budiardjo and Nurlela were accused of document forgery by Agung Sedayu Group, owned by Sugianto Kusuma, also known as Aguan. Agung Sedayu Group, through its subsidiary PT Sedayu Sejahtera Abadi (PT SSA), made the accusation regarding land ownership documents. These documents pertain to Girik C.1906 Persil 36 S.II for 2,231 square meters from Abdul Hamid Subrata, and Girik C.5047 Persil 30 S.II for 548 square meters from Edy Suwito.
Agung Sedayu Group is also the owner of the prominent PIK 2 development project (PT PANI). Sugianto Kusuma is not only a successful entrepreneur but also a well-known philanthropist and volunteer at Yayasan Budha Tzu Chi Indonesia.
Both Budiardjo and Nurlela were charged under Articles 263 and 266 of the Indonesian Penal Code for document forgery. However, the charges were made without forensic testing to confirm the authenticity of these documents. A forensic laboratory test should have been conducted to determine whether the documents were indeed fake. Strangely, this crucial step was skipped, yet the case was still pushed forward to trial at the West Jakarta District Court, where both were sentenced to two years in prison.
Bias in the Police Investigation
The handling of this case shows signs of bias and unprofessional conduct by the police, seemingly under the influence of Agung Sedayu Group. While the police processed the reports from Agung Sedayu, the complaints filed by SK Budiardjo and Nurlela were ignored and left unresolved.
The issue began in 2006, when SK Budiardjo and Nurlela legally purchased land supported by Girik C.1906, C.5047, and C.391. From the time they took ownership, and even when the land belonged to its previous owners, no other party claimed the land. Budiardjo and Nurlela fenced the property, filled it in, and used it for business purposes.
On April 21, 2010, the land was forcefully seized. Thugs, backed by members of the Mobile Brigade (Brimob) allegedly at the request of Agung Sedayu Group, blocked access to the property and assaulted SK Budiardjo. No legal notice, such as a lawsuit or warning letter, was issued by PT SSA before this violent action took place.
Legal Reports Filed by SK Budiardjo
In response, SK Budiardjo filed several police reports, including:
- Report No. LP/424/IV/2010/PMJ/Restro Jakbar on April 21, 2010
- Report No. LP/1950/VI/2010/Dit Reskrimum-UM on April 21, 2010
- Report No. LP: TBL3176/IX/2010/PMJ/Dit Reskrimum-UM on September 8, 2010
- Report No. LP/TBL/4529/IX/2016/PMJ/Dit Reskrimum-UM on September 5, 2016
However, these reports have yet to receive proper follow-up. The National Police Headquarters (Mabes Polri) issued several recommendations, including investigating the officers involved for professional misconduct. Despite these recommendations, the case remains stagnant.
The Lack of Scientific Evidence
One of the most significant issues in this case is the failure to conduct a forensic lab test to determine whether the land documents owned by SK Budiardjo were falsified. After five years, the police returned the original documents to Budiardjo, implying they were authentic. This raises the question of why the case proceeded without scientific proof and whether the police investigation was influenced by external pressures.
During his tenure as Chief of the Propam Division, General Listyo Sigit Prabowo met with SK Budiardjo and expressed his confusion over the case. Despite having sufficient evidence, the case did not move forward, prompting questions about whether the police were being manipulated by powerful land mafias, such as Agung Sedayu Group, under the leadership of Sugianto Kusuma (Aguan).
Addressing Legal Failures: A Plea for Transparency and Fairness in Indonesia’s Law Enforcement
Budiarjo and Nurlela have been imprisoned based on allegations of document forgery, yet there is a troubling lack of forensic evidence to substantiate these claims. This raises serious legal questions about the integrity of the investigation. Will Police Chief General Listyo Sigit Prabowo reconsider the case and initiate a new investigation, in line with his commitment to scientific crime investigation? Additionally, it is imperative that Alexander Halim Kusuma, the Director of PT SSA during the events of 2006, be prosecuted as a suspect.
This situation highlights widespread concerns regarding the impartiality of law enforcement in Indonesia, especially when powerful entities such as Agung Sedayu Group are involved. A thorough re-investigation employing scientific methods could shed light on the truth and ensure that justice prevails.
Matériaux
Outils
Étape 1 -
Published
Français
English
Deutsch
Español
Italiano
Português