Djoko Tjiptono/Hendra & GB, Jakarta – Chairman of the People's Democratic Party (PRD) Budiman Sudjatmiko met the National Ombudsman Commission and then went to the Supreme Court to protest the handling of the party's case against 13 high ranking military and civil officials who blamed the PRD for the 27 July 1996 incident.
As reported widely, on 27 July 1996 supporters of Megawati Sukarnoputri, now Vice President, were violently attacked by hired thugs backed by military and police at the headquarters of the Indonesian Democratic Party (PDI). The supporters had been holed up in the building for around one month after Megawati was ousted from the PDI leadership in an internal party 'coup' orchestrated by the New Order regime of former president Suharto.
The PRD, formed by student activists in 1996, were drawn into supporting Megawati along with many other activists at the time because of the government sponsored 'coup' and her standing as an 'opposition' leader.
At least 5 died in the riots that ensued in Jakarta and an unknown number of others 'disappeared' in the following weeks and months. The government then launched a smear campaign against the PRD, claiming they incited the riots and were communists. Budiman and many other party members were later jailed for three or more years on 'subversion' and other charges.
The Party has since began proceedings through the Central Jakarta District Court against the 13 considered most responsible, including the former and present governors of Jakarta, Suharto and numerous other military commanders.
Budiman along with five members of the People's Defendant and Democracy Team representing the PRD felt the case had been handled in a most unprofessional and questionable manner and took their complaints to a higher level on Tuesday.
During his meeting with Antonius Sujata from the National Ombudsman Commission, Budiman said he was actually worried that the handing down of the Central Jakarta District Court's intermediate decision in the upcoming session on October 26 could harm the PRD. The decision was the result of a clumsy and suspect process which indicated the court's disinterest in upholding the law.
At the Supreme Court, Budiman told reporters that the government had defiled his name and the PRD by accusing them of triggering the 27 July 1996 riots. He also said they were compelled to plead their case at the offices of the Ombudsman and Supreme Court because they felt the judge had passed an irrelevant and misleading judgement in the last hearing of the case. They demanded the Supreme Court issue an instruction to the Central Jakarta District Court to pick up its act and uphold the law.
In the last hearing, the PRD had asked to present the testimony of an expert witness and of those directly involved in the occurrences of that fateful day before the court. However, the judges ruled that there was no grounds for this.
According to Paulus R. Mahulette SH, a member of the Democracy Team, just because they said there were no grounds did not mean that the accounts could not be presented before the court.
"In our opinion, with this matter not being formally regulated, it doesn't mean that it can't happen. And it must be noted that in a most important way, the regulations governing these matters are no longer suitable under the present circumstances. This is just a hand-me-down from the old colonial system. In addition, in our opinion, the Supreme Court has the authority to ask for information and give instructions to courts at all levels of the judicial system," Mahulette said.
"We came here only wanting the Supreme Court to discuss whether it is possible to present an expert witness in this case," Budiman said. Budiman and the legal team were welcomed by junior head of the Supreme Court for Criminal cases, MS Kartasasmita SH.