Tony Hotland, Jakarta – The retraction of testimony by a key witness in the murder of rights activist Munir Said Thalib might not do great harm to the prosecutors' case, two prominent legal experts have said.
Raymond J.J. Latuihamallo, also known as Ongen, withdrew last week statements documented during the second hearing of a case review filed by the Attorney General's Office. In the statements, he claimed that he had seen defendant Pollycarpus Budihari Priyanto with Munir having a drink at a coffee shop at Singapore's Changi airport.
Claiming he had been forced by the investigators to say so, Ongen said he did see Munir having a drink with another man, but did not know whether or not it was Pollycarpus.
"Retraction of statements is common. The ones made in court, however, are what the judges consider. Ongen's retraction may affect the case a bit and the prosecutors will have to support the case with more incriminating evidence," Rudi Satriyo of the University of Indonesia said Sunday.
He said the prosecutors would have to find other witnesses to counter Ongen's retraction. Several police officers are set to take the stand this week to challenge Ongen's testimony.
Witness Asrini Utami Putri, who sat in front of Munir on the Garuda Indonesia Jakarta-Amsterdam flight on Sept. 7, 2004, the day Munir died of poisoning, testified that she had seen Pollycarpus with Munir and Ongen at the cafe.
Denny Indrayana, a legal expert at Gadjah Mada University, said Ongen's withdrawal could have been prompted by pressures from others linked to the murder.
"It certainly affects the course of the trial, and he should be cross-checked with the investigators," he said.
The two academics were commenting on a judicial review filed by state prosecutors on Pollycarpus, an off-duty Garuda pilot who was assigned to be on Munir's flight.
Pollycarpus was cleared of murder charges last year, although the Supreme Court still sentenced him to 22 months in jail for forging documents.
Both experts said it was too early to know if Ongen's statements or the new set of evidence indicated that the case might be weak, but they agreed the recent developments would still not be enough to find the murderer.
"Ongen's statements alone aren't taking us to the core of the trial, that is to find the culprit. A taped conversation played in the trial also wouldn't be sufficient to conclude who the murderer is," Rudi said.
Denny was more certain that Pollycarpus was involved in the case but said it would require more hard evidence to see the extent of his alleged involvement.
"His speaking jargon used in the intelligence world shows he may be an agent. And his dozens of phone conversations with (State Intelligence Agency director) Muchdi PR call for more digging," he said.
But Rudi warned that the verdict for a judicial review case could not be tougher than the last sentence, and the court cannot charge Pollycarpus for murder since the case has been scaled down to document forgery.
"It's no longer a murder case because the Supreme Court has cleared Pollycarpus of it. And since this is a judicial review, it should correspond to the last situation of the case," he said.
Denny disagreed, however, saying the case was still a legitimate murder case.