Jakarta – "At a time when the country was sinking in the crisis, the actions of the defendant truly violated one's sense of justice." Akbar abused his power, said Abdurrahman Saleh, the only justice with a dissenting opinion on the panel of five justices of the Supreme Court that finally acquitted Golkar leader Akbar Tandjung on charges of misusing Rp 40 billion in funds belonging to the State Logistics Agency (Bulog).

Abdurrahman said Tandjung had hurt the public, betrayed the trust of the president who entrusted him with Rp 40 billion to be disbursed to the poor, and was therefore involved in corruption.

The defendant, he said, "is proven guilty of shameful conduct [perbuatan tercela] because he failed to show minimal, appropriate efforts to protect state money amounting to Rp 40 billion, which the president entrusted to him to coordinate [its use and disbursement for the poor] with related ministers." The former head of the Jakarta Legal Aid Office, who read his opinion after the announcement of the verdict, referred to legal opinions that supported his argument.

He said that although the justices ruled that Akbar's action did not violate the law, he was of the view that based on the law the defendant's action could be categorized as "corrupt practice". This, he said, comprised the act of enriching oneself, or others, or legal entities, "which directly or indirectly leads to losses on the part of the state".

Akbar's "shameful" action, which "wounded the hearts of the public" included the following, Abdurrahman said:

• The defendant did not put the project, worth Rp 40 billion (to disburse basic needs to the poor), to tender;
• According to the rules there should have been bids from at least three parties;
• The appointment (of a legal entity) to conduct a project worth Rp 40 billion should not have been made verbally;
• Reports should have been made to the president (on the use of the funds), whereas the president did not receive any such reports;
• Appointment (of a legal entity) implementing a project worth Rp 5 billion or more should have been made with the permission of the coordinating minister of the economy and industry;
• An instruction from the president to use nonbudgetary funds should have been based on a written presidential instruction.

Abdurrahman added that the Development Finance Comptroller (BPKP) had, on March 23 and March 31, 1999, reminded Bulog to stop the receipt and issuance of nonbudgetary funds. "If this had been heeded the entire case might have been avoided," he said.

In the end the collection of funds that were not in line with existing rules "burdened the people," Abdurrahman said. The defendant, he continued, "cannot rely on the excuse that it was an emergency" because he failed to prove that the use of nonbudgetary Bulog funds was the only way to help alleviate the burden on the poor at that time.

The Supreme Court's verdict, based on the fact that nonbudgetary Bulog funds were not among those covered in a 1994 presidential decree on project funds, "should be seen in the context that, in accordance with good governance, the spirit and meaning of that presidential decree could have served as a guideline." While the justice said the defense had implied that Akbar had acted in line with the presidential decree, "what happened was that the defendant engaged in actions that violated decency ... [and] prudence in line with the principles of good governance, that there should not be any abuse of power."

Akbar's legal journey

February 10, 1999: President B.J. Habibie asks Minister/State Secretary Akbar Tandjung, during a cabinet meeting, to channel Rp 40 billion in funds belonging to the State Logistics Agency (Bulog) to a food for the poor program.

October 11, 2001: Akbar admits he knew about the money and says it was channeled directly to the Raudatul Jannah foundation led by Dadang Sukandar, who subsequently named Winfried Simatupang as contractor of the charity program. The program never materialized.

January 7, 2002: The Attorney General's Office (AGO) names Akbar a suspect in the scandal.

March, 7, 2002: Akbar is detained in a cell at the AGO.

March, 25, 2002: The Central Jakarta District Court begins the trials of Akbar, Dadang and Winfried.

April, 5, 2002: Akbar is released from his cell. September 4, 2002: The court convicts Akbar and sentences him to three years in jail.

January 17, 2003: The Jakarta High Court upholds the lower court's verdict on Akbar.

March, 20, 2003: Akbar files an appeal with the Supreme Court.

February 12, 2004: The Supreme Court rules in favor of Akbar and acquits him on all charges, but upholds sentences on Dadang and Winfried.