TEMPO.CO, Jakarta - An unseemly legal step has been taken by non-active Governor of Southeast Sulawesi Nur Alam. He is suing expert witness Basuki Wasis, who calculated the environmental damage resulting from the mining licenses issued by the governor. The judge of the Cibinong District Court in Bogor, West Java, who is handling the case, must throw out this unfounded lawsuit.
This lawsuit of Nur Alam, who has been sentenced to 12 years imprisonment in a mining license corruption case, is not based on legal provisions. It ignores the immunity of witnesses as is clearly regulated in the Law on Witness and Victim Protection. This principle is enshrined in Article 10 of that law: witnesses, victims, and reporting parties cannot be sued under the criminal or civil law for reports or testimony which is about to be given, is being given, or which has already been given.
Basuki`s testimony was an important breakthrough in exposing corruption surrounding a mining license. The Corruption Eradication Commission (KPK) asked this lecturer from the Bogor Agricultural Institute (IPB) to calculate the ecological losses resulting from the mining business license issued to Anugrah Harisma Barakah in Southeast Sulawesi. To date, only the amount of state funds lost or potential revenues have been calculated in corruption cases. According to Basukis calculations, the total environmental damage resulting from the mining of nickel in the Buton and Bombana Regencies amounts to Rp2.7 trillion.
Unfortunately, this ecological damage was not a part of the judges' consideration when sentencing Nur Alam. He was given a lighter sentence than was sought by the prosecution, which demanded 18 years imprisonment. This politician from the National Mandate Party (PAN) was only found guilty because it was proven he had abused his authority and enriched himself by giving a mining license to Anugrah, resulting in state losses of Rp1.5 trillion. This did not include the amount of environmental damage as calculated by Basuki. For that reason, the KPK prosecutor filed an appeal, a measure also taken by the convicted party, but for a different reason.
The ongoing legal process for Nur Alam's case means that Basuki's testimony is still relevant. The appeal court judge should figure in the ecological losses in this mining license corruption case. The KPK and the Witness and Victim Protection Agency should do all it can to protect Basuki. These two institutions must protect this expert witness from all threats and defend him against Nur Alam's lawsuit.
In addition to harassing the witness, with this lawsuit, Nur Alam is actually ignoring the rights of citizens who care about environmental damage. This right is guaranteed under the Law on the Environment. Anyone who fights for good and healthy environmental rights cannot be charged under criminal law, or sued under civil law.
Moreover, the reasoning used by Nur Alam is weak. He accuses Basuki of breaking the law in a way which created losses for the defendant. This lawsuit which references Article 1365 of the Civil Law Code is contrived because Basuki did not break the law. The KPK officially requested that he come forward as an expert witness. Even in court, he gave his testimony under oath.
Defending Basuki is of utmost importance to smooth the way towards exposing similar corruption cases tied to mining licenses. Let's not have this lawsuit against Basuki become a bad precedent, and make people wary of testifying against corruption cases.
Read the full article in this week's edition of Tempo English Magazine
