Asmadinata , obtaining bribery case defendant has been found guilty by a panel of judges Semarang Corruption Court . He was sentenced to five years and a criminal fine of Rp 200 million subsidiary of two confinement .
However, Asmadinata still mind and judge ruling against him strange . The verdict was read in court on Tuesday ( 04/22/2014 ) it does not consider the facts in the trial .
" I am here affirmed that decision dissenting opinion ( DO ) or a different opinion is not wrong . A judge is given the authority and it is guaranteed by law . I DO ‘s rights and legitimate rights according to the rules , " said the judge after a consideration commenting Asmadinata listen to the verdict at the detention room Semarang Corruption Court on Tuesday .
According to the former Dean of the Faculty of Law, University of Darmawangsa , Medan , a judge can do anything creative in determining the verdict . Decisions taken by a different judge could not be assessed right or wrong , because it was right as the court .
" The judge could decide anything , could also free , " he explained .
Defendant’s legal counsel , Joseph Parera added, it claimed to have known that his client will be found guilty . Guess it’s because since the beginning of the reading of the verdict , the prosecutor at the Commission already smiling .
" Prosecutors from the beginning has been smiling at the introductory assembly with Heru said Kartini Marpaung and defendant . Well , if you have this , Mr. Asthma definitely hit this , " Parera guess .
Parera also mengkiritik consideration in deciding the defendant judges . For him , the decision of the DO who had thought his client was not to blame . The defendant also not be taking Asmadinata DO and choose to punish defendants who attempted to bribe M Yaeni , with criminal 2 years and five months in prison .
" It’s a strange decision . DO verdict was not so taken into consideration . Decisions clearly outlines the role of Kartini and Heru , but defendant did not exist at all . The judge told participate on August 17 , when the date of August 14, 2014 had left for Malaysia , "protested the lawyer Semarang .
He also still think that the considerations that led the judges judge Dwiarso Budi Santiarto it wrong . The evidence , consideration of a law that says the defendant participate receive , can not be accepted . Because there is no follow-up or an attempt by the defendant to ask for a bribe of Heru Kisbandono rations and Kartini Marpaung .
"If you want to follow up , it should ask for the contact he added. Heru also in the trial had no contact Asthma . So , how to get in touch , let alone take part , " he added .
( Read: suara burung pleci )
In this case , the judge assesses Asmadinata guilty of violating the provisions of Article 12, Clause C of Law No. 31 of 1999 as amended and replaced by Law No. 20 of 2001 in conjunction with Article 55 ( 1 ) of the Criminal Code to - 1 . Three elements in the article , the judge accepts a gift or pledge and commit or participate in committing a crime , are met .