Hanin Marwah, Jakarta – SETARA Institute has criticized the Jakarta High Military Court II-06 ruling, which reduced the sentences of two of the four defendants in the acid attack case against Andrie Yunus. In its verdict, the panel of judges revoked the military discharge penalty and reduced the prison terms for the first defendant, Second Sergeant (Serda) Edi Sudarko, and the second defendant, First Lieutenant (Lettu) Budhi Hariyanto Widhi Cahyono.
Hendardi, Chairperson of the SETARA Institute National Council, stated that the ruling demonstrates the state's lacking commitment to delivering justice for the victim. "The decision shows how the legal process is designed as an instrument to perpetuate impunity," Hendardi said in a written statement on Sunday, September 6, 2026.
Under the appeal decision, Edi Sudarko's sentence was reduced from three years to two years and six months in prison. Meanwhile, Budhi Hariyanto Widhi Cahyono's sentence was reduced from two years and six months to two years. In addition to reducing their prison terms, the appellate judges overturned the dismissal of both officers from military service.
Meanwhile, sentences for the third defendant, Captain Nandala Dwi Prasetyo, and the fourth defendant, First Lieutenant Sami Lakka, remained unchanged. Captain Nandala received a two-year prison sentence, while Lettu Sami was sentenced to one year and six months.
Hendardi noted that the appellate ruling, which reduced the penalties and canceled the dismissals of both perpetrators, was predictable from the outset. According to him, the reduced sanctions confirm that the legal process fails to penalize offenders, let alone deliver justice to victims.
"On the contrary, the mechanism is considered as a means to spread fear among civilians and anyone brave enough to monitor, criticize, and demand accountability for the behavior of authorities," he said.
Furthermore, he highlighted that the primary flaw in handling the case stems from a crisis of credibility across the judicial mechanism. According to Hendardi, trying the case in a military court was fundamentally flawed from the beginning. He views this choice of venue as an institutional arrangement that shields perpetrators while exposing victims to revictimization.
Law enforcement proceedings were initially managed by the police within the civilian judicial system. However, the case was subsequently taken over following intervention by the TNI Military Police Center (Puspom TNI) and ultimately transferred to a military justice.
He stressed that this jurisdictional shift compromises judicial independence and legal accountability. For the SETARA Institute, when military personnel accused of crimes against civilians are investigated, prosecuted, and tried by their own internal system, a conflict of interest becomes inevitable.
Structurally, he added, the military justice system is inherently incapable of offering independence or accountability when judging its own members. When officers are tried internally, the legal proceedings risk compromise, a narrowing of scope, and institutional self-preservation that smothers the truth.
"Bringing this case to military court signals that the state is more interested in institutional damage control than in ensuring justice for the victim," he said.
Additionally, the SETARA Institute criticized authorities for compelling the KontraS activist to testify while he was still undergoing critical medical treatment. Hendardi condemned this treatment as disrespectful, emphasizing that it further revictimized the target of the attack.
Therefore, Hendardi stated that the public cannot trust the legal proceedings or the verdicts produced by military courts in this case. This lack of trust is a logical consequence of the state's failure to provide an independent and transparent judicial process.
According to him, the court's decision in the Andrie Yunus case legitimizes the continuation of impunity in Indonesia. He believes the legal process has lost credibility regarding the rule of law and civilian supremacy.
"What is collapsing is not only justice in a single case, but also public trust in the state and the law itself," Hendardi said.
Source: https://en.tempo.co/read/2119061/acid-attack-ruling-fosters-impunity-setara-say