Heru Andriyanto - A hearing began on Monday for a pre-trial motion filed by a group of lawyers who challenged a decision by the Attorney General's Office to drop criminal charges against two Corruption Eradication Commission deputy chairmen.

Demanding the bribery and power abuse case against Chandra M Hamzah and Bibit Samad Rianto be reinstated, the petitioners argued the decision was unlawful and lacked any legal standing because only judges, and not prosecutors, had the authority to decide whether or not a case was worthy of being tried.

Prosecutors dropped the case due to "pressure from the public, certain groups and prominent community leaders who called on the president to halt the case, while such reasons are not recognized by the Indonesian Criminal Procedures Code," the lawsuit says.

"We've come here today not to seek reimposition of criminal charges against Chandra and Bibit but to ensure that criminal procedures are implemented consistently, regardless of who the suspects are," lawyer Ferry Amarhorsea told reporters.

He was speaking after the hearing in the South Jakarta District Court.

Ferry was representing more than 50 lawyers who believe that dropping the criminal charges against the two deputies could set a bad precedent for the country's already unpredictable justice system and they joined forces to challenge the decision.

The lawyers also noted that while prosecutors had declared the investigation complete, they dropped the case only because it would be "morally harmful than beneficial to go to court," an argument that had no legal standing.

"We are protecting the Criminal Procedures Code and ensuring its consistent implementation by prosecutors," Ferry said.

Inside the court, prosecutor Wisnu Baroto denied any external influence in the decision to halt the case.

"Prosecutors have carefully examined the case documents and their decision not to bring the case to court is based on legal considerations, not instructions by the president or anyone else," Wisnu said.

The prosecutor also questioned the competency of the lawyers to become the plaintiffs in the case because they weren't included as authorized persons to lodge a pre-trial motion according to the Criminal Procedures Code.

Prosecutors early this month decided not to take the pair to court due to strong indications the case had been set up by elements from the National Police and Attorney General's Office who conspired with case brokers.

The case against the pair drew massive public outrage and was an embarrassment for the government.