Legal Counsel Claims Nine Irregularities in Former Jampidsus Case Handling

The legal team for former Deputy Attorney General for Special Crimes (Jampidsus) Febrie Adriansyah has identified nine alleged irregularities in the handling of his client's money laundering case. Lawyer Febri Diansyah stated that these issues represent legal procedural violations by the Attorney General's Office.

Among the claimed discrepancies is the practice of combining two separate criminal offenses, corruption and money laundering, into a single indictment. Diansyah argued this violates legal principles, stating that separate indictments should be issued if evidence supports distinct charges, with a new indictment for money laundering only pursued after sufficient evidence is gathered from the initial corruption investigation. He cited Law No. 8 of 2010 as the basis for this argument.

Further alleged errors include inconsistencies in the indictment documents, such as conflicting details between the "considering" and "command" sections. For instance, one indictment reportedly mentioned a subsidiary of Krakatau Steel while the command section referred to a coal investigation, and vice versa. The defense also pointed to a significant error in the alleged timeframe of the criminal act (tempus delicti), with one indictment stating the coal case occurred between 2028 and 2026, a temporal impossibility.

Diansyah also raised concerns about the principle of leniency under the new criminal code. He noted that the indictment cited articles from Law No. 8 of 2010 concerning money laundering, even though these articles have been updated in the new criminal code (KUHP). According to the principle of lex favor reo, the most lenient applicable law should be used, which Diansyah argues is Article 3 of the new KUHP.