Trisakti University criminal law expert Abdul Fickar Hadjar assesses that the Attorney General’s move to name Tom Lembong as a suspect in the sugar import case was a reckless step. He also considered that the Attorney General’s Office had played politics by naming Tom Lembong as a suspect without any strong basis for corruption.
“The prosecutor’s office has been reckless and playing politics. The naming of Tom Lembong as a suspect because of his policy is inappropriate and baseless. Determining this suspect is dangerous, because it will result in people not having the courage to become public officials to manage the country,” said Fickar to Media Indonesia, Thursday ( 10/31).
Fickar assessed that Tom Lembong’s policies could not be punished because he had the authority as Minister of Trade at that time. Tom Lembong can be punished if he obtains something or material from his policies.
“This is called abuse of office, gratification, but as a public policy that can apply to anyone, including granting import permits, it cannot be criminalized,” he said.
Fickar believes that the matter of Tom Lembong not coordinating with other public officials is not a matter for the Attorney General’s Office and does not fall under criminal law. He admitted that he was suspicious that the naming of Tom Lembong as a suspect was politically motivated.
“This is clearly criminalization. Maybe it’s because Tom was once on the successful team of one of the candidates in the presidential contest. If you want to question it, why only now, why not 8 years ago? Meanwhile, the previous trade minister with the same policy did not qualify as a crime “This is truly discrimination and criminalization,” he said.
Fickar also highlighted that if Tom Lembong abused his authority, President Jokowi and BUMN Minister Erick Thohir should also know about this.
“If you want to question it, why was the president, as the superior of the Minister of Trade, silent at that time, or did the BUMN minister not react? This means that the president and the BUMN minister also did not question the policy, even when President Jokowi was in power, he stated that the policy should not be criminalized,” he said.
Furthermore, Fickar encouraged the Attorney General’s Office to prove that there was a flow of funds leading to Tom Lembong. He said this had to be done to dispel suspicions of criminalization in the case.
“The Attorney General’s Office must also prove that there is a flow of funds leading to Tom Lembong, because what Tom Lembong carried out was a continuation of policies from previous officials or ministers. Unless Tom Lembong, with this policy, obtained something of high economic value,” he said. (Z-9)
#Tom #Lembong #Sugar #Import #Suspect #Legal #Expert #Prosecutors #Office #Reckless
**Interview with Abdul Fickar Hadjar on the Tom Lembong Sugar Import Case**
**Interviewer:** Thank you for joining us today, Abdul Fickar Hadjar, a criminal law expert from Trisakti University. You have recently commented on the Attorney General’s decision to name Tom Lembong a suspect in the sugar import case. Could you elaborate on your views regarding this decision?
**Abdul Fickar Hadjar:** Thank you for having me. I believe that the Attorney General’s decision to name Tom Lembong as a suspect is a reckless step. The basis for labeling him a suspect appears weak, and it seems to involve more political maneuvering than legitimate legal concerns.
**Interviewer:** What specifically makes you question the validity of the evidence or rationale behind this move?
**Abdul Fickar Hadjar:** Firstly, Tom Lembong was acting within his capacity as the Minister of Trade at the time. His policy decisions should be viewed in the context of his authority, and unless there’s clear evidence of personal gain from these actions, it’s inappropriate to label them as criminal acts. The prosecution could set a dangerous precedent that deters individuals from taking on public roles due to fear of legal repercussions for their policy decisions.
**Interviewer:** You mentioned political motivations behind the prosecution. Can you elaborate on what you mean by that?
**Abdul Fickar Hadjar:** It raises suspicions that this case may be politically motivated, as it targets an individual for policy decisions without concrete evidence of wrongdoing. There seems to be an agenda behind the timing and the nature of these accusations, which could undermine trust in our legal system.
**Interviewer:** So, you’re suggesting that the decision might discourage future public officials from acting decisively due to fear of investigation?
**Abdul Fickar Hadjar:** Exactly. If officials fear prosecution for their policy decisions, it could lead to paralysis in governance. The naming of Lembong as a suspect risks creating an environment where public servants are hesitant to make bold decisions that are in the interest of public welfare.
**Interviewer:** In your opinion, what would be a proper course of action for the Attorney General’s Office regarding such cases?
**Abdul Fickar Hadjar:** A thorough investigation that clearly delineates between policy decisions and criminal behavior is essential. If there are allegations of corruption, such as abuse of office or improper gratification, those need to be substantiated with compelling evidence before any legal action is taken.
**Interviewer:** Thank you, Abdul Fickar Hadjar, for your insights on this important issue. It’s crucial to ensure that our legal system maintains its integrity while also protecting those who serve in public office.
**Abdul Fickar Hadjar:** Thank you for having me. It’s vital to have discussions like these to uphold the rule of law and ensure accountability without political bias.