Legal Expert Questions Facts Presented in Ahok Judicial Review

TEMPO.CO, Jakarta - A Legal expert from Universitas Indonesia Chudry Sitompul has his own assessment of the four facts contained in the Judicial Review of former Jakarta Governor Basuki Tjahaja Purnama (Ahok).

Chudry argues that one of the facts submitted by Ahok’s lawyer Fifi Lety Indra should not have challenged the court by highlighting, what Lety claims is an element of the judge’s mistake. Chudry views a judge has the prerogative right to not consider that element.

Read also: Ahok Judicial Review Not Related to Presidential Candidacy

“The judge did not consider the defendant’s suggestion. That is not a mistake. That’s the judge’s subjective right,” said Chudry on Wednesday, February 28.
Furthermore, Chudry explained that the four new facts presented by Ahok’s lawyer should not have been taken to a judicial review. He argues that it could be properly accepted in an appeal.

“A judicial review must present new elements such as a novum (existing evidence that was not presented in court) and a judge’s mistake. However, the proof they brought up could not prove the judge’s mistake,” he said.

Previously on Monday, February 26, Fifi revealed four new facts at the North Jakarta District court session. She argued that the judge made a mistake by not presenting facts regarding the residents of Pramuka Island and Thousands Island who personally witnessed Ahok’s speech and were enraged by the speech.

Read: Ahok Victim of Hate Politics Amnesty International Says

“The fiasco of Ahok’s speech sparked after a video was uploaded by Buni Yani in Facebook,” said Fifi.

According to Fifi, other elements that were not considered by the judge were the video of Abdurrahman Wahid (Gus Dur) who said that Muslims are not barred from electing non-Muslim leaders, and the fact that Ahok was cooperative throughout the series of trials.

M JULNIS FIRMANSYAH