TEMPO.CO, Jakarta - Law enforcement authorities must be transparent in handling the case involving the CEO of MNC Group Hary Tanoesoedibjo. They should not let the case form an impression that the laws in this country can be easily manipulated for political interests. Hary Tanoe's camp also needs to exercise restraint so that the legal process can go smoothly.

Their professionalism, in this case, is highly critical as the case involves an official of the Attorney-General Office (AGO). The police named Hary Tanoe as suspect for allegedly threatening the head of AGO's investigation sub-directorate, Junior Attorney-General for special crimes Yulianto via short messages. There are potentials for conflict of interest as the case will be handled by the AGO.

The messages at the center of the case were sent early last year. That time, the prosecutor was handling a case involving Mobile-8, one of the companies owned by Hary Tanoe. A string of messages, among others, read, ¡°Mas Yulianto, we'll prove who is wrong and who is right. Who is professional and who is a thug." It also said, "I went into politics to, among others, fight unscrupulous law enforcers who engage in transactional activities and power abuse. Mark my words here: I'm going to be the leader of this country."

The businessman who is also the chief of United Indonesia Party was charged with article No. 29 of the electronic information and transaction law. The key elements of the article govern threats or intimidation via electronic messages. Both the police and the prosecution must handle the case fairly and professionally. To start with, the sender's intent to threaten must be proven as the article can be interpreted multiple ways and are often used flexibly.

The AGO must also fully disclose the handling of Mobile-8 case which triggered the pandemonium in the first place, now that it is reopening the case alleged to have caused the state losses of Rp80 billion. The case was based on suspicious transactions amounting to Rp260 billion between Mobile-8 and Djaja Nusantara Komunikasi during 2007-2009. Mobile-8 used the transactions--suspected to be fake--to seek tax refunds. Hary Tanoe was the commissioner of Mobile-8 at the time.

The reopening of the Mobile-8 case was quite controversial because the prosecution had already lost at the pre-trial hearing, the motion for which was filed by Mobile-8's director, Anthony Chandra, and Djaja Nusantara's director, Hary Djaja, both suspects in the case. The pre-trial judge declared the prosecution did not have the authority to handle tax cases.

On his part, Hary Tanoe must respect the legal process. MNC Group's media outlets must stop publishing incessant news to criticize the prosecution. This kind of practice can be labeled as using the press for personal interests. Hary Tanoe's move to bring in Presidium 212--a group that staged protests against Basuki Tjahaja Purnama alias Ahok--to his defense is also excessive. Any form of pressure on the legal process is unjustifiable.

President Joko Widodo should not keep silent in this case. He should push the AGO to resolve the case professionally. Only a fair and transparent legal process will remove the perceived discrimination by the law enforcement or the impression that the laws can be abused for political interests.

Read the full story in this week’s edition of Tempo English Magazine