Skip to main content

Blackmailing Prosecutors from the South

The absence of money evidence could free two prosecuting attorneys charged with blackmailing Jamsostek Director Achmad Djunaidi.

THE two attorneys, Cecep Sunarto and Burdju Ronni Allan Felix, were not wearing their “royal uniforms” when appearing in the South Jakarta District Court, Thursday last week. They were not on duty as “prosecuting attorneys,” since they were the persons being prosecuted, the defendants. The two kept mum most of the time. “Just ask my attorney,” said Burdju in reply to questions being fired by reporters.

Cecep, 38, and Burdju, 35, the two prosecutors from the South Jakarta District Court, were suspected of having extorted the former PT Jamsostek Director, Achmad Djunaidi, from November through December last year. At that time, Djunaidi was undergoing an investigation involving the suspected corruption of Rp331 billion.

The case involving the two prosecutors started from the reading of the verdict on Djunaidi on April 27. The judges headed by Sri Mulyati gave Djunaidi eight years in prison or half the prosecutor-demanded sentence. The presiding prosecutor, Heru Chairuddin, instantly gave notice of appeal. Djunaidi shouted, “It’s personal vengeance, isn’t it? You want me dead?” he said. Djunaidi grabbed a nameplate and hurled it at Heru. Missing, the projectile hit the wall.

Djunaidi shouted before the judge that he had already given the team of judges Rp600 million. Djunaidi’s revelation uncovered the “blackmailing prosecutors” case. Attorney General Abdul Rahman Saleh ordered that the five prosecutors investigating the Djunaidi case be examined. They—Heru Chairuddin, Pantono, M.Z. Idris, Cecep, and Burdju—were interrogated by the Corruption Eradication

Early in May, the five prosecutors were confronted with Aan Hadi Gusnanto, Djunaidi’s “cashier.” When asked who he’d contacted and gave money to, Aan without hesitation pointed at Cecep and Burdju. Cecep and Burdju claimed they did not know Aan and had never received anything whatsoever from him. “Well, that’s their right,” said Aan.

According to a prosecutor of the Corruption Eradication Team, the examination did show that only Cecep and Burdju blackmailed Achmad. During the investigation, said the source, Heru Chaeruddin reminded both not to beat about the bush. Cecep and Burdju were indicted under the Corruption Eradication Law. The prosecuting attorney, Ali Mukartono, charged both with extortion or receiving a present.

According to Ali, the case started with Djunaidi’s request to Aan to find out who the prosecutor handling the case was. Djunaidi wanted his case to be heard soon or to be put under house arrest. Then Aan contacted his acquaintance Kenti Supriyatin, an employee of the South Jakarta District Court. Kenti introduced Aan to Cecep and Burdju. Upon transmitting Djunaidi’s request, Cecep asked: “Is there money or not?” Aan replied: “Rupiah or dollar?” The next day, Aan brought Rp100 million which he received from Djunaidi.

Two days after the encounter, Cecep asked for an additional Rp250 million. The request was fulfilled. Then, as if addicted, in December 2005, Cecep telephoned Aan again, asking for operational funds amounting to the same amount as the second request. Djunaidi did not fulfill it, giving him Rp200 million only.

Aan brought the money to Cecep’s office. But Cecep asked Aan to meet Burdju. While in Burdju’s office, a short text message from Cecep was sent, reading, “He deliberately withheld the 50. Just reject it if not complete.” Apparently Cecep sent the message to the wrong person. The text message was intended for Burdju. Aan was offended, and took the money back. But the next day Burdju called. Aan returned to the prosecutor’s office and gave the Rp200 million to Cecep.

To Tempo, Achmad Djunaidi confirmed the story in the prosecutor’s charges. According to him, he simply asked Aan to have the court hearing expedited. “Instead of releasing me,” said the Lubuklinggau-born man. He believed he did not harm the state in this case, “as it is a civil case.”

One of Burdju’s and Cecep’s attorneys, Elza Syarief, pointed out that the charges were not clear. According to Elza, the prosecutor was not sure whether this was a case of extortion or bribery. Had it been a bribery, she said, Djunaidi and Aan should have been tried as well. According to Elza, Burdju claimed he had never met with and received money from Aan. “These charges are hollow because no evidence is presented,” she said. “No money confiscated.”

Prosecuting attorney Ali Mukartono refused to respond to Elza’s accusation. To Tempo, he stated his reason. “It is already part of the case material.” He ensured that despite absence of evidence, it did not mean that the prosecution was weak. The team of prosecutors, he said, had in their possession evidence, such as records of telephone calls and a number of witnesses.

Elza Syarief believed that the prosecutor did not have evidence of a telephone conversation. “There’s only a missed call,” she said. But, according to Aan, the Corruption Eradication Team did have evidence of telephone connections from him to Cecep and Burdju. “There are some 30 [phone connections] as evidence, [and] some lasted four minutes,” said Aan. “So it’s impossible it’s simply a missed call.”

Aan was convinced that even though the prosecutor was unable to present Djunaidi’s money as evidence, the proof held by the Corruption Eradication Team would send the two prosecutors to jail. One item he had in his possession was that “the wrongly addressed text message” from Cecep, for example, had already been submitted to the Corruption Eradication Team. “The two prosecutors surely cannot get away,” he said.

Abdul Manan, Ramidi, Fanny Febiana

Ensnared by Promissory Notes

EVERYTHING started in 2001 when Achmad Djunaidi, President Director of PT Jamsostek (state-owned social insurance firm), agreed to buy medium-term notes worth Rp311 billion. The purchase of Rp97.8 billion in notes was offered by PT Dahana, Rp100 billion by PT Sapta Pranajaya, Rp80 billion by PT Indo Pradana, and Rp33.2 billion worth of notes by PT Volgren. The payment for the promissory notes stagnated, thus causing Djunaidi to have trouble with the Corruption Eradication Team.

Djunaidi, 63, was accused of not having applied the principle of caution in investment, as regulated by the Jamsostek Law. According to prosecuting attorney Heru Chairuddin, the board of directors should have paid attention to the security of the corporate wealth and investment security. Also, Djunaidi was viewed as not having studied the feasibility in order to judge the bona fide nature of the four companies that sold the promissory notes.

Heru indicted Djunaidi with the Corruption Eradication Law. This Lubuklinggau, South Sumatra-born man, faced a 16-year-jail sentence plus a fine of Rp200 million and Rp133.250 billion payment for state losses.

The judge did not fully fulfill the sentence demand. On April 27, 2006, the panel of judges led by Sri Mulyani sentenced Djunaidi to eight years in prison, a Rp200 million fine and the obligation to pay the state Rp66.625 billion for the financial losses it incurred. The payment for the state losses was to be shared by Andy Rahman, former Jamsostek Investment Director, who also got eight years. According to Sri Mulyani, Djunaidi and Andy had been proven guilty of violating the principles of caution in investing the Jamsostek funds.

Djunaidi gave notice of appeal. But in mid-October 2006, the Jakarta High Court upheld the jail sentence for Djunaidi. The judge only overturned the obligation to pay the Rp66.625 billion losses incurred by the state. Now, Djunaidi has given notice of cassation. “There has been no evidence he committed corruption or obtained money from his investment policy,” declared Djunaidi’s attorney M. Sholeh.


Tempo Magazine, No. 11/VII/Nov 14 - 20, 2006


Popular posts from this blog

Melacak Akar Terorisme di Indonesia

Judul: The Roots of Terrorism in Indonesia: From Darul Islam to Jemaah Islamiyah Penulis: Solahudin Penerbit: University of New South Wales, Australia Cetakan: Juli 2013 Halaman: 236

Kronologis Penyerbuan Tomy Winata ke TEMPO

Oleh: Ahmad Taufik, Wartawan Majalah TEMPO Prolog Peristiwa yang terjadi pada hari Sabtu, 8 Maret 2003, telah menodai kemanusiaan dan kehidupan yang beradab di negeri ini. Sekelompok orang dengan uang yang dimilikinya mengerahkan massa, menteror dan berbuat sewenang-wenang. Aparat keamanan (polisi) juga tidak berdaya, dan dipermalukan di depan masyarakat (minimal saksi mata dan saksi korban). Apa yang akan saya ceritakan disini adalah kronologi penyerbuan yang tak beradab dan penyelesaian akhir yang terputus. Saya sebagai saksi mata, saksi pelaku sekaligus saksi korban (yang mendengar, melihat dan merasakan kejadian). Saya akan klasifikasikan secara terbuka dalam laporan ini: apa itu informasi, yang saya lihat, saya dengar, saya rasakan, analisa atau kesimpulan. Soal kata akhir terserah masing-masing pihak yang tersangkut disini, karena saya tidak bisa terima dan sekaligus tertekan secara psikis. Inilah laporan lengkapnya: Rabu, 5 Maret 2003 Saya ditelepon oleh Desmon J.Mahesa, kuasa h