Tuesday, September 27, 2005

The Consequences of a 'Flawed System'

The Corruption Crimes Court has declared KPU member Mulyana Kusumah guilty. In the meantime, the KPK has vouched to continue investigations into further allegations of corruption involving the KPU.

LAST Monday, Gina Santayana, the eldest daughter of Mulyana Kusumah listened intently to judicial panel chairperson Masruddin Chaniago as he read out the court's verdict over her father at the Corruption Crimes Court in Jakarta. When Chaniago delivered the verdict, Santayana burst into tears. "That is not fair," she cried after Chaniago announced that the court had sentenced the defendant to "two years and seven months in prison."

Kusumah, a member of the General Elections Commission (KPU), was found guilty of bribing Supreme Audit Agency investigating audit team chief, Khairiansyah Salman. Kusumah was caught handing over Rp150 million to Salman at the Ibis Hotel in Slipi, Jakarta, last April.

According to the presiding judicial panel, Kusumah had violated Article 5 of Law No. 20/2001 on Eliminating Crimes of Corruption. This provision specifically targets people who commit bribery with the intention of asking a government official to grant them a favor. The legislation carries a maximum penalty of five years in prison and a Rp250 million fine.

Ironically, the court verdict over Kusumah was more lenient than the prosecutor's indictment had called for. In his indictment, the prosecutor called upon the court to sentence Kusumah to three years in prison in addition to a Rp50 million fine. Kusumah himself reacted calmly to the verdict. When asked whether he planned to accept the verdict or appeal it, Kusumah said, "I will think about it first."

Kusumah's lawyer, Sirra Prayuma, expressed disappointment with the verdict. Prayuma claims that the court did not take into consideration certain factors that prompted Kusumah to commit the act. According to Prayuma, Kusumah was merely honoring an agreement made between Mubari and Khairiansyah at the Miyama restaurant in the Borobudur Hotel on March 10. "Kusumah was merely fulfilling the commitment made during that meeting," Prayuma explained.

Prayuma also criticized the court for not taking into consideration the fact that Kusumah provided a great service to the nation as a member of the KPU. "Kusumah participated in the process of consolidating democracy by helping to bring about peaceful and smooth elections. The court should have considered this service," said Prayuma.

However, Corruption Eradication Commission (KPK) Deputy Chairperson of Action, Tumpak Hatorangan Panggabean, claims that the court did consider Kusumah's services in delivering its verdict. According to Panggabean, the fact that the prosecution only called upon the court to sentence Kusumah to three years in prison, and the fact that the court only sentenced Kusumah to two years in prison prove that the court considered these factors. "They were considered, although not explicitly mentioned," said Panggabean.

In the meantime, anti-corruption activists have called upon the KPK to continue its investigations into further allegations of corruption involving members of the KPU. Deputy Coordinator of Indonesia Corruption Watch, Lucky has pushed the KPK to actively investigate these cases. Lucky suggests that the KPK investigate both KPU members and KPU secretary staff, claiming that evidence already exists implicating other KPU members of corrupting state funds. "The buck should not stop at Mulyana alone," he said.

For the KPK, these public demands are justified. "Investigations into alleged corruption involving the KPU will definitely not stop here," said Panggabean.

Separately, former KPU deputy secretary-general, Sussongko Suhardjo, was sentenced to two years and six months in prison, last Monday, having also been found guilty of bribing Khairiansyah Salman.

Salman himself has refused to comment on the court verdict over Kusumah, other than to say "The court verdict must be respected." Salman also warned that any person could suffer a similar fate to Kusumah. "Kusumah is a good person, the system forced him to act that way," he said.

In the meantime, Kusumah's case may have triggered a corruption witch-hunt. Reports have surfaced that a number of other KPU officials will also be tried. Among this list of suspects is the former KPU head of election ink provision, Rusadi Kantaprawira; former KPU public bureau chief, Bambang Budiarto; former KPU secretary-general, Safder A. Yussac, and Mochamad Dentjik. "The investigation case files over Rusadi are almost finished," said Panggabean.

At present, KPU Chairperson, Nazaruddin Sjamsuddin, and Finance Bureau chief, Hamdani Amin, are currently being tried at the Corruption Crimes Court. The prosecution has accused both Sjamsuddin and Amin of misappropriating US$566,795 in insurance premium discount funds given to the KPU by PT Asuransi Umum Bumi Putera Muda. Also facing trial is the former treasury chief for XI Jakarta, Soedji Darmono. Darmono has been charged with accepting US$40,000 and Rp50 million from former KPU Deputy Treasurer Mochamad Dentjik.

Former budget sub-directorate chief at the Department of Finance, Ishak Harahap, is also currently being investigated by the KPK. Harahap has been accused of accepting US$39,000 from Dentjik in order to push through the revised budget proposed by the KPK. Separately, Cecep Harefa, project broker for the provision of election pamphlets is also facing trial. "They have all been placed in custody," said Panggabean. It remains to be seen how many other KPU members will also be brought to trial.

Abdul Manan, Siska S. Handayani

TEMPO, SEPTEMBER 26, 2005-003/P. 44 Heading Law

Sunday, September 25, 2005

Siapa Menyusul Mas Mul

Hakim menyatakan Mulyana terbukti melakukan penyuapan. Komisi Pemberantasan Korupsi menjamin akan terus mengusut kasus korupsi di KPU.

DUDUK di barisan bangku kedua pengunjung ruang pengadilan, Gina Santayana tampak tegar. Putri sulung Mulyana W. Kusumah itu dengan cermat mendengarkan setiap kalimat yang diucapkan hakim Pengadilan Tindak Pidana Korupsi di Jakarta, Senin pekan lalu. Namun, begitu ketua majelis hakim Masruddin Chaniago menyebut kalimat "menjatuhkan vonis pidana penjara dua tahun tujuh bulan kepada terdakwa", wanita 28 tahun itu langsung terisak. Air matanya meleleh. "Ini tidak adil," katanya lirih, seperti bergumam.

Majelis hakim memvonis Mulyana bersalah. Ia terbukti melakukan penyuapan terhadap Ketua Tim Audit Investigasi Badan Pemeriksa Keuangan (BPK), Khairiansyah Salman. Anggota Komisi Pemilihan Umum (KPU) yang selama ini dikenal sebagai kriminolog itu tertangkap basah saat menyerahkan uang Rp 150 juta di kamar 609 Hotel Ibis Slipi, Jakarta, awal April lalu.

Mulyana, dalam amar putusan yang dibacakan Chaniago, dinyatakan terbukti melanggar Pasal 5 Undang-Undang Nomor 20 Tahun 2001 tentang Pemberantasan Tindak Pidana Korupsi. Inilah pasal yang menjerat siapa saja yang memberi atau menjanjikan sesuatu kepada pegawai negeri atau penyelenggara negara, agar mereka melakukan atau tidak melakukan sesuatu. Ancaman terhadap pelanggaran pasal ini adalah hukuman penjara hingga lima tahun dan atau denda hingga Rp 250 juta.

Vonis untuk Mas Mul--demikian dosen Universitas Indonesia itu biasa disapa rekan-rekannya--lebih ringan dari tuntutan jaksa. Dalam sidang pertengahan Agustus silam, jaksa menuntut Mulyana hukuman penjara tiga tahun dan denda Rp 50 juta. Mimik wajah Mulyana, Senin ketika vonis dibacakan itu, terlihat tetap tenang. "Saya akan berpikir dulu," katanya saat hakim bertanya akan menerima atau melakukan banding terhadap putusan itu.

Pengacara Mulyana, Sirra Prayuma, tampak cukup kecewa terhadap putusan yang dijatuhkan Chaniago. Menurut dia, hakim dalam mengambil putusan tersebut tidak mempertimbangkan faktor yang mempengaruhi Mulyana melakukan tindakannya itu. Faktor itu, pertemuan Mubari dengan Khairiansyah di Restoran Miyama Hotel Borobudur pada 10 Maret lalu. "Uang setoran Mulyana kepada Khairiansyah adalah komitmen dari pertemuan itu," kata Sirra.

Sirra juga mempertanyakan jasa kliennya sebagai anggota KPU, yang sepertinya tak dilirik hakim. "Mulyana ikut mengawal proses konsolidasi demokrasi melalui pemilu damai dan lancar. Itu seharusnya dipertimbangkan," ujarnya. Namun Wakil Ketua KPK Bidang Penindakan, Tumpak Hatorangan Panggabean, menampik tudingan Sirra bahwa pihaknya tak memperhitungkan jasa Mulyana. Menurut Tumpak, tuntutan tiga tahun terhadap Mulyana dan vonis dua tahun penjara juga karena memperhitungkan jasa Mulyana. "Sudah menjadi pertimbangan, walau tidak diucapkan," katanya.

Banyak pihak memang berharap KPK terus membongkar korupsi di tubuh KPU. Lucky, Wakil Koordinator Indonesia Corruption Watch, adalah salah satu yang menuntut itu. Dia berharap KPK bersikap fair dalam kasus ini. KPK, katanya, harus terus mengusut keterlibatan anggota dan staf sekretariat KPU lainnya dalam kasus korupsi ini. Apalagi, ujarnya, sudah ada bukti-bukti sejumlah anggota KPK lainnya melakukan penggangsiran uang negara. "Hukumannya jangan hanya berhenti pada Mulyana seorang," kata dia.

Bagi KPK, tuntutan atau harapan masyarakat seperti itu dianggap wajar. "Pengusutan korupsi di KPU memang tak akan berhenti di sini," ujar Tumpak. Selain Mulyana, Sussongko Suhardjo, Wakil Sekjen KPU, Senin pekan lalu divonis hakim dua tahun enam bulan penjara. Ia dinyatakan terbukti ikut melakukan penyuapan terhadap Khairiansyah.

Khairiansyah, salah satu tokoh utama di balik penangkapan Mulyana, memilih tak mau berkomentar banyak terhadap hukuman yang diterima Mulyana. "Putusan hakim itu putusan hukum yang harus dihormati," katanya. Menurut karyawan Badan Pemeriksa Keuangan ini, siapa saja bisa mengalami nasib seperti Mulyana. "Mulyana orang baik, tapi sistem yang memaksanya menjadi begitu," ujarnya.

Kasus Mulyana kini berputar dan merembet ke mana-mana. Sejumlah pejabat KPU, misalnya, dipastikan bakal dibawa ke meja hijau. Mereka, antara lain, Ketua Pengadaan Tinta Pemilu Rusadi Kantaprawira, Kepala Biro Umum Bambang Budiarto, bekas Sekretaris Jenderal KPU Safder A. Yussac, dan Mochamad Dentjik. "Berkas pemeriksaan Rusadi kini juga hampir selesai," kata Tumpak.

Ketua KPU Nazaruddin Sjamsuddin dan Kepala Biro Keuangan Hamdani Amin kini juga tengah disidang di Pengadilan Tindak Pidana Korupsi. Jaksa menuduh kedua orang itu menggelapkan uang US$ 566.795 (sekitar Rp 5,6 miliar) diskon premi asuransi PT Asuransi Umum Bumi Putera Muda 1967 yang diberikan kepada KPU. Selain itu, yang juga segera diadili adalah Kepala Kanwil Ditjen Perbendaharaan XI Jakarta, Soedji Darmono. Soedji didakwa menerima dana US$ 40 ribu (sekitar 400 juta) dan Rp 50 juta dari Wakil Bendahara KPU Mochamad Dentjik.

Selain Soedji, Kepala Sub-Direktorat Anggaran Departemen Keuangan Ishak Harahap kini juga diperiksa KPK. Ishak didakwa telah menerima dana US$ 39 ribu (sekitar Rp 390 juta) dari Dentjik. Duit itu sebagai jasanya memuluskan revisi anggaran yang diajukan KPK. Selain itu, ada pula Cecep Harefa, broker proyek pengadaan buku panduan pemilu. "Semuanya itu sekarang kami jebloskan ke dalam tahanan," kata Tumpak. Akankah ada nama-nama anggota KPU yang lain yang akan menyusul? Hingga kini memang belum jelas benar. ***

Abdul Manan, Siska S. Handayani

TEMPO Edisi 050925-030/Hal. 112 Rubrik Hukum

Sunday, September 18, 2005

Vonis untuk Tian dan Antariksa

Gugatan pengaduan pencemaran nama baik ANTV dikabulkan hakim. Kasus ini menuju proses banding ke Pengadilan Tinggi.

KETUA Serikat Pekerja ANTV untuk Kesejahteraan, Tian Bachtiar, 39 tahun, sudah membaca gelagat buruk itu. Setelah bersidang selama sekitar dua bulan, Selasa lalu, majelis hakim Pengadilan Negeri Bekasi memvonis dirinya bersalah. Wartawan senior yang sudah 10 tahun bekerja di stasiun televisi milik keluarga Aburizal Bakrie itu diperintahkan ketua majelis hakim Agus Iskandar membayar ganti rugi Rp 250 juta kepada ANTV.

Tian tak sendiri. Koordinator juru kamera ANTV, Antariksa Puspanegara, 40 tahun, mengalami nasib sama. Selain harus membayar Rp 250 juta, keduanya oleh hakim diperintahkan meminta maaf kepada ANTV lewat iklan di media massa selama tiga hari berturut-turut. "Saya akan banding atas putusan ini," kata Tian.

Keduanya digugat oleh PT Cakrawala Andalas Televisi, perusahaan tempat mereka bekerja, lantaran dianggap mencemarkan nama ANTV. Tian dan Antariksa pada 24 Februari lalu melaporkan direksi ANTV telah menggelapkan dana Jaminan Sosial Tenaga Kerja (Jamsostek) karyawan televisi itu (Tempo, 29 Mei 2005). ANTV kemudian menggugat kedua karyawan itu dengan tuntutan uang sebesar Rp 20 miliar, sekaligus meminta pengadilan menyita rumah dan memblokir rekening bank mereka.

Tian mengaku sudah mencium kekalahannya pada Juli lalu ketika hakim menolak keberatannya lewat putusan sela. Ketika itu, ia meminta persidangan dihentikan lantaran kasus dugaan penggelapan dana Jamsostek yang diadukannya sedang diproses polisi. Padahal, inilah penyebab ANTV menggugat dirinya. Ia juga mempermasalahkan lokasi persidangan di Bekasi. "Padahal, ini bukan masalah individu antara saya dan ANTV," ujarnya.

Menurut Tian, kasus ini berawal dari adanya sejumlah karyawan ANTV yang tak bisa mengambil dana Jamsostek yang menjadi hak mereka--salah satunya adalah Antariksa. Para karyawan kaget karena selama ini perusahaan telah memotong gaji mereka dengan alasan untuk dana jaminan kerja itu. Merasa ada yang janggal, Januari silam, Serikat Pekerja meminta klarifikasi ke PT Jamsostek. Jawabannya: ternyata ANTV sejak 1999 hingga 2003 menunggak pembayaran Jamsostek.

Antariksa sendiri, lewat kuasa hukumnya yang tergabung dalam Koalisi Anti-Penindasan Pekerja Media, mengajukan somasi kepada ANTV. Mereka menuntut masalah tunggakan ini diselesaikan. Serikat Pekerja juga beberapa kali berupaya menemui pihak manajemen untuk membicarakan masalah ini. Tapi, pertemuan yang diharapkan tak kunjung terlaksana.

Karena itulah, pada 24 Februari, didampingi Perhimpunan Bantuan Hukum dan Hak Asasi Manusia, Tian melapor ke Polda Metro Jaya perihal adanya penggelapan dana Jamsostek di perusahaannya. Dua hari kemudian, manajemen ANTV bereaksi. Tian dan Antariksa kena skorsing. Belakangan, keduanya digugat ke pengadilan dengan tuduhan melakukan pencemaran nama baik.

Akibat laporan Tian ini pula, sejumlah direktur ANTV diperiksa polisi. Menurut Aji Wijaya, pengacara ANTV, sampai kini kliennya diperiksa sebagai sebatas saksi. Aji mengakui ANTV melakukan penunggakan pembayaran Jamsostek. "Tapi sekarang sudah kita lunasi seluruhnya," ujarnya. Dana tunggakan yang dibayar tak kurang dari Rp 2,4 miliar. Dalam laporan Jamsostek, tercatat pembayaran ANTV itu untuk 2000, 2002, dan 2003. Pembayaran dilakukan pada 18 Februari 2005, saat kasus ini mencuat.

Palu hakim sudah diketuk. Kendati ganti rugi hanya Rp 250 juta dan tuntutan penyitaan dan pemblokiran rekening tak dipenuhi hakim, Aji menyatakan menerima putusan hakim. "Bagi kami, yang penting tergugat sudah dinyatakan melakukan perbuatan melawan hukum," katanya.

Putusan yang dijatuhkan pengadilan ini mendapat kecaman dari pengacara LBH Jakarta, Gatot. Menurut dia, tak sepatutnya pengurus serikat pekerja digugat karena menjalankan tugasnya. Sesuai dengan Undang-Undang Nomor 13/2003 tentang Ketenagakerjaan, katanya, salah satu tugas serikat pekerja adalah memperjuangkan kesejahteraan anggotanya. Selain itu, UU Nomor 21/2000 tentang Serikat Pekerja, menurut Gatot, juga melindungi tugas semacam itu. "Pasal 28 UU itu melindungi pengurus serikat pekerja dari intimidasi, mutasi, dan pemutusan hubungan kerja karena tugas yang mereka yang lakukan."

Abdul Manan, Siswanto

TEMPO Edisi 050918-029/Hal. 110 Rubrik Hukum

Sunday, September 11, 2005

Rekomendasi Macan Ompong

Pekan ini, Komisi Yudisial akan mengeluarkan rekomendasi tentang kasus pemilihan Wali Kota Depok. Rekomendasi itu tak akan mempengaruhi putusan Mahkamah Agung.

SEMBARI bergegas menuju mobil, Ketua Pengadilan Tinggi Jawa Barat, Nana Juwana, menangkis semua tudingan yang dialamatkan kepadanya. Ekspresi wajahnya menyiratkan kegugupan saat puluhan wartawan menyodorkan alat perekam kepadanya di pelataran kantor Direktorat Jenderal Perundang-undangan, Departemen Hukum dan Hak Asasi Manusia, Jakarta, Senin pekan lalu.

"Itu fitnah," katanya dengan nada tinggi menanggapi pertanyaan wartawan perihal dugaan suap di balik putusan lembaganya yang membatalkan kemenangan Nurmahmudi Ismail-Yuyun Wirasaputra dan menyatakan Badrul Kamal-Syihabuddin sebagai pemenang dalam pemilihan Wali Kota Depok.

Nana juga menepis tuduhan adanya pertemuan dirinya dengan tim sukses Badrul Kamal di sebuah rumah makan di Jalan Raya Pasteur, Bandung, apalagi adanya uang pelicin di balik vonisnya. Dia mengaku siap diberhentikan sebagai hakim bila terbukti salah. "Kalau tidak terbukti, saya siap mengadukan balik," katanya. Dia tak menyebut siapa yang akan digugatnya.

Hampir enam jam dia bersama empat anggota majelis hakim Pengadilan Tinggi Jawa Barat yang menangani kasus itu diperiksa anggota Komisi Yudisial yang berkantor di Departemen Hukum dan HAM. Masing-masing hakim diperiksa oleh satu atau dua anggota Komisi.

Kelima hakim itu dicecar dengan 35 sampai 50 pertanyaan, mulai dari soal penggunaan hukum acara serta proses pengambilan keputusan. Pemeriksaan berlangsung tanpa henti dan hanya di sela salat dan makan siang. Beberapa pertanyaan itu di antaranya perihal pengajuan gugatan yang melebihi batas 14 hari yang dinilai melanggar Undang-Undang Pemerintah Daerah, soal kesahihan bukti yang diajukan penggugat, kompetensi absolut pengadilan, dan dasar yang dipakai dalam menjatuhkan putusan.

Hingga Kamis pekan lalu, sejumlah anggota Komisi Yudisial masih mempelajari lima Berita Acara Pemeriksaan (BAP) kelima hakim dan mulai memberi penilaian. Sumber di Komisi menyebutkan, sistem penilaiannya memakai scoring. Caranya, masing-masing anggota Komisi akan memberi penilaian atas sekitar 10 hal yang sudah dimasukkan ke dalam matriks.

Hasil penilaian itu akan dibawa ke rapat pada Kamis pekan ini. Jika ditemukan kata sepakat, pekan ini juga Komisi akan membuat rekomendasi. Menurut Ketua Komisi Yudisial, Busyro Muqoddas, tak tertutup kemungkinan komisinya akan memanggil KPU Depok, Badrul Kamal, dan Nurmahmudi jika data yang ada dinilai kurang. "Setelah itu, kami membuat analisis akhir dan rekomendasi, yang segera dikirim ke Mahkamah Agung, dengan tembusan Presiden dan DPR," ujar Busyro.

Ada tiga jenis rekomendasi yang bisa diberikan Komisi Yudisial, yakni peringatan tertulis, pemberhentian sementara, atau pemberhentian. Rekomendasi pertama, kata anggota Komisi, Irawady Joenoes, bersifat mengikat. Rekomendasi kedua dan ketiga tergantung Mahkamah Agung, sebab Undang-Undang Nomor 22 Tahun 2004 hanya mewajibkan Mahkamah Agung mengeksekusi rekomendasi Komisi Yudisial jika pembelaan hakim yang bermasalah itu ditolak Majelis Kehormatan Mahkamah Agung.

Sumber Tempo di Komisi menyebutkan, beberapa kesimpulan sementara dari hasil pemeriksaan sebagian anggota Komisi tak jauh berbeda dengan penilaian tim panel Mahkamah Agung. Sebelumnya, tim panel yang diketuai Hakim Agung Paulus Lotulung, setelah memeriksa para hakim itu menilai para hakim telah melampaui kewenangan serta melakukan unprofessional conduct (tindakan tidak profesional).

Apa pun hasil pemeriksaan, Komisi ini tak berwenang menyentuh substansi putusan yang sudah diketuk hakim Pengadilan Tinggi Jawa Barat itu. Sesuai dengan UU Nomor 22/2004 tentang Komisi Yudisial, selain mengusulkan pengangkatan hakim agung, tugasnya memang hanya sebatas mengawasi perilaku hakim. "Substansi putusan tidak termasuk dalam kewenangan kami," kata Busyro Muqoddas.

Lantaran keterbatasan wewenang yang ada pada Komisi Yudisial, walhasil, apa pun rekomendasi yang dikirimkan, praktis penentuannya di tangan MA. "Itu terserah MA, apakah mau dibuang, apa mau dibahas-terserah MA," kata Ketua Mahkamah Agung Bagir Manan.

Tak wajibnya Mahkamah Agung melaksanakan semua rekomendasi Komisi, menurut Muqoddas, membuat lembaga yang dipimpinnya seperti macan ompong. Padahal, menurut dia, sudah jamak jika sebuah lembaga yang diberi kewenangan melakukan tindakan juga memiliki kekuasaan menentukan sanksi. "Karena itu, dalam waktu dekat kami akan merancang usulan draf revisi UU tentang komisi ini," kata Muqoddas. ***

Abdul Manan dan Riska Handayani

TEMPO Edisi 050911-028/Hal. 106 Rubrik Hukum

Monday, September 05, 2005

Going Around in Circles

The Yogyakarta Police have formed yet another team to investigate the murder of Bernas daily reporter, Udin.

TWO weeks ago, a team of 12 police investigating officers began collecting evidence to solve the murder of Bernas journalist, Fuad Muhammad Syafruddin, better known as Udin. "We are calling it the Udin team," Yogyakarta Police Investigating Director, Dadang Rusli told Tempo last Thursday.

Yogyakarta Police have promised to deliver results with this new team. Two weeks ago, Yogyakarta Police Chief, Brig. Gen. Bambang Aris Sampurno promised representatives from the Indonesian United Journalists Association (PWI), the Indonesian Journalists Alliance (AJI) and a number of non-governmental organizations that the investigating team was planning to solve the case as soon as possible.

On August 13, 1996 Udin was rushed to hospital after being beaten in front of his house on Jl. Parangtritis in Bantul. On August 16, 1996 he was pronounced dead. But, police have still been unable to track down those behind his murder.

Every year since Udin's murder, legal aid organizations and journalists in Yogyakarta have commemorated both Udin's death and National Press Day by pushing the president, the House of Representatives and the National Police Chief to step up investigations into the case. And this year was no different with Udin's colleagues demanding that the police take the case seriously.

On November 20, 2004 shortly after Susilo Bambang Yudhoyono was appointed President of Indonesia, the PWI Yogyakarta sent a letter to Yudhoyono requesting him to review Udin's case. On June 3, a second letter was sent to the president. And on June 30, the State Secretary responded to this letter.

Signed by the Deputy State Secretary of Policy Support, Sumarwoto, and addressed to the Chief of Yogyakarta Police, the letter requested Yogyakarta Police to step up investigations into Udin's death. However, Dadang Rusli claims that the decision to form a new team assigned to investigate Udin's case was not motivated by the State Secretary's letter.

Now, all hopes for closure in the case rest with the police "Udin team". According to Rusli, the team will join forces with the existing fact-finding team at the Yogyakarta Police to focus on the reasons and motives behind Udin's murder.

The original police investigating team, formed shortly after Udin's death, focused on an alleged affair that Udin was having with another man's wife. These investigations resulted in the declaration of Dwi Sumaji, the husband of Udin's alleged lover, as the key suspect in Udin's murder. Police came to the conclusion after discovering a photograph of Sumaji's wife, Sunarti, in Udin's wallet. Indeed, both Udin and Sunarti were on the board of directors of an Intra-School Students Organization in Madrasah, Bantul.

Sumaji was even brought to court, but was exonerated from all charges after telling the court on October 22, 1997 that he had admitted to murdering Udin in return for a house, a car, a job and an award from the Governor of Bantul. During trial, Sumaji testified that these promises had been made to him by the Bantul Police Department investigating chief, Edy Wuryanto. The court exonerated Sumaji from murder charges on November 27, 1997.

Ironically, no action was taken against Edy Wuryanto, although he had lost evidence in the form of Udin's notes and had thrown away a sample of the victim's blood, which Udin's family had lent him. This blood sample was reportedly thrown into the South Java Sea.

However, the AJI Yogyakarta and the Southeast Asian Press Alliance (Sapa) decided to sue the National Police Chief and the Military Police Central Commander, accusing them of failing to investigate Wuryanto, who had since been transferred to the National Police HQ Investigation Corps.

In 2004, trial began over Wuryanto at the Military Court and on May 27, 2005 the Yogyakarta Military Court sentenced Wuryanto to 20 months in prison, having found him guilty of losing evidence.

In the meantime, the PWI has claimed that Udin's murder was linked to a number of articles that he wrote and published in the Bernas daily. Another team of independent journalists, naming themselves the White Kijang Fact-Finding Team, has also made this claim. According to the PWI, Udin's murder is linked to an article published in Bernas, titled "Only Half of the IDT Funds were Distributed", reporting the alleged misappropriation of village assistance funds (IDT).

The PWI claims that this scenario is supported by evidence, including a memo sent by former Governor of Bantul, Sri Roso Sudarmo, to the former Karanganyar district chief, Hardi Purnomo, on July 27, 1996, requesting information regarding the IDT funds and preparing a lawsuit against the Bernas editors. The memo also asked that the case be resolved before August 17, 1996. "We don't know whether it is a coincidence or not, but Udin died just one day before the deadline," said Yogyakarta PWI's Asril Sutan Marajo.

According to Marajo, Sri Roso Sudarmo also held a press conference on August 23, 1996 denying any link to Udin's murder. Based on this evidence, the PWI fact-finding team believes that the former Governor of Bantul was somehow involved in Udin's murder.

Marajo also claims to have evidence that could shed more light on the case, in the form of receipts from a motorcar garage revealing that former Karanganyar district head, Hardi Purnomo, purchased a spare part similar to the one allegedly used to beat Udin with.

The White Kijang team, comprising colleagues of Udin, also claims that Udin's murder was linked to articles that he wrote. The first article reported the alleged payment of Rp1 billion in bribe money from Sri Roso Sudarmo to the Dharmais Foundation; the second article reported the alleged misappropriation of IDT funds.

Based on these findings, the Yogyakarta press community remains convinced that Udin's murder was linked to the articles that he wrote. In fact, two weeks ago, AJI Yogyakarta head, Bambang Murdoko, presented these findings to the National Police Chief during a private meeting. "If we only concern ourselves with matters that have already been dealt with, it is hard to believe that the case will be solved," he said.

In the meantime, nine years have passed since Udin was brutally murdered, yet the police have no leads on Udin's murderer. Last Wednesday, Udin's mother Mujillah told Tempo that she remained hopeful that Udin's murderer would eventually be found. "If the police are serious, they should investigate Sri Roso," she said.

Sri Roso Sudarmo himself refused to comment on the case. "I have nothing to say about it. I am tired of that case," he said.

Abdul Manan, Heru C.N., Syaiful Amin

TEMPO, SEPTEMBER 05, 2005-052/P. 30 Heading Law