In the prosecutor’s demands, Fernando is the owner of 2,598 milliliters of liquid cocaine.

Tangerang, posinternasional.com

The lawyer of Fernando Miguel Gama De Sousa, a Portuguese citizen, who was involved in drugs, Prof. OC Kaligis stated that investigators are not witnesses based on the Criminal Procedure Code (KUHAP) in article 1 number 1.

“Investigators are police officers of the Republic of Indonesia or civil servants who are given special authority by law to conduct investigations,” said OC Kaligis as quoted in a duplicate submitted to the Tangerang District Court judge, Banten, Thursday.

He said that based on Article 1 number 26 of the Criminal Procedure Code, a witness is a person who can provide information for the purposes of investigation, prosecution and trial of a criminal case that he heard, saw and experienced himself.

This is related to prosecutor Raden Isjunianto who demanded that Fernando present three members of the National Police and Polda Metro Jaya, namely Jainuddin, Oktavianto, Wisnu Bagus as witnesses in the trial led by judge M Alfi Sahrin Usuf.

In the prosecutor’s demands, Fernando is the owner of 2,598 milliliters of liquid cocaine stored in a shampoo bottle in a purple backpack found in a hotel room 3361 in the Pecatu area, Bali.

Fernando’s legal advisor from the law firm of Prof. OC Kaligis, namely Fredy Maxi Paat, Muhammad Firdaus and Ainunnisa Dhika Fajri submitted the duplicate to the judge and prosecutor.

According to him, thus, the investigator examining the case cannot be categorized as a witness in the a quo case.

The information given by the defendant that is different from the Examination Report (BAP) is the defendant’s right and is not burdened with proof, this is guaranteed in article 52 junto article 189 paragraph 1 of the Criminal Procedure Code.

However, article 52 of the Criminal Procedure Code explains that in the examination at the investigation and trial levels, the defendant has the right to provide information freely to the investigator or judge.

However, in Article 189 paragraph 1 of the Criminal Procedure Code it is explained that the defendant’s statement is what is stated in court about the actions he did or what he knew and experienced himself.

Concerning the crown witness, Rui Pedro Azevedo Viana, a Portuguese citizen who is also a defendant being tried separately has stated in court that he met at the Ibis Hotel in Lisbon, Portugal through Rodrigo who is on the police’s Wanted List (DPO).

In fact, witness Rui Pedro did not throw or throw money as accused by investigators, but the police team took it from Rui’s hands.

According to him, the evidence of liquid cocaine that has been destroyed does not belong to Fernando and was not confiscated from Fernando, this is evidence by the prosecutor even though it has been destroyed before the trial.

In fact, evidence must be presented at trial because it is considered not dangerous and is an inseparable part of a criminal justice system, the destruction of evidence is contrary to Article 194 paragraph 3 and Article 39 paragraph 1 of the Criminal Procedure Code.

** (adi)

Related Posts