LAURENS YAHYA, DIRECTOR OF PT BLS, TOGETHER WITH YENY, FINANCIAL MANAGER ARE FREE FROM THE DECISION OF THE PN JUDGE AND THE MA JUDGE.

Jakarta, posinternasional.com.

The decision of Supreme Court Judge Dr. H. Suhadi, SH. MH Rejecting the JPU’s cassation, upholding the decision of Judge Faizal Hendri, SH. MH, Central Jakarta District Court for case no. 204/pid.B/2021/PN Central Jakarta made Laurens Yahya feel like he had received true justice.

Laurens Yahya, 49 years old as Director of PT BLS and Heny Wihardja, 44 years old as financial manager of PT BLS were charged by the prosecutor with violating Article 374 of the Criminal Code in conjunction with Article 55 paragraph (1) to 1 of the Criminal Code with a sentence of 4 years.

During the trial, the defendant’s attorney in his defense requested that the panel of judges hearing this case acquit the defendant because it was not proven legally and convincingly as the indictment and demands of the public prosecutor.

In essence, the request for the panel of judges examining and trying the case (a quo) from all charges or to release from all legal charges (Onslaag van alle rechvervolging)

In the decision of the panel of judges at the Central Jakarta District Court, Laurens Yahya and Leny Wihardja were explained.

Hearing Witness Suwandi Wiratno, Director of PT CIUM, in the trial, no criminal elements were found because the witness told Laurens Wijaya that if there was a recommendation for a prospective buyer of unit A. 07 Allegra Apartment, then PT CIUM was open to accepting offers from anyone interested.

Witnesses Rene and Rohman on behalf of PT Putra Agung Perkasa explained that the transfer from Laurens Yahya as Director of PT BLS amounted to 1,052,500.00 one billion fifty-two million five hundred thousand Rupiah through the defendant Heny Widjaya was always the manager to jangan.

Where witness Rene Adolf Wawaouw is the family of witness Wiliam Kalip who ordered the transfer to the account of witness Rene and witness Rohman, no criminal elements were found.

From the statement of Expert witness Dr. Mompang L Panggabean SH, M Hum in the consideration of the panel of judges’ decision.

To make a loan to a bank or third party because the Bridging Loan rule as stipulated in the Financial Services Authority Regulation POJK no. 32 of 2018 concerning the maximum limit for providing credit to the company PT BLS has reached a maximum loan of 3.5 billion to witness Wilim Kalip.

By using a personal account so that PT BLS avoids the Bridging Load rule, the criminal elements of Laurens Yahya and Heny Wihardja are not fulfilled.

In the decision of the panel of judges Faizal Hendri SH handed down the verdict for Laurens and Heny as in the first, second and third indictments have been proven but are not criminal acts.

Release Laurens and Heny from all lawsuits (Onslag Van Alle rechvervolging.

Restoring the rights of dignity in ability, status, dignity and dignity. Evidence 1 to 25 are attached to the case. 14 photocopies containing E Banking Transfer CR.

An a Laurens yahya and Transfer deposit DR 5250269252 an PT BLS were returned to PT Bangun Lintas sesuai through Coky Yudhistira.
While the Supreme Court Judge’s cassation decision also upheld the decision of the Central Jakarta District Court Judge.

In the decision of Judge Dr. Suhadi SH MH. Explaining the applicant’s cassation.

In the audit conducted by witness Muhammad Wahyudi as an auditor, he stated that he could not confirm any losses in the management of the company.

The defendants cannot be held criminally responsible for the problems in the a quo case are civil matters.

The reason for the public prosecutor’s cassation regarding the assessment of the results of evidence that is of an appreciation nature regarding a fact is the authority of JUDEX FACTI.

As described in the cassation memorandum is a repetition facts that have been considered properly and correctly by JUDEX FACTI.

Rejecting the cassation application of the applicant, the Central Jakarta District Attorney’s Office.

Cannot be considered in the cassation level examination as it should be, the method of trial is not carried out according to the provisions of the Law, the Court exceeds its authority as intended in Article 253 paragraph (1) of the Criminal Code

Based on these considerations, the cassation applicant, the public prosecutor, cannot prove the JUDEX FACTI decision.

Does not meet the provisions of Article 253 paragraph (1) letter a. Law no. 8 of 1981. Based on Article 254 concerning criminal procedure law, the cassation application from the public prosecutor is rejected.

Charging the court costs to the State. Thus the decision in the Deliberation meeting of the Panel of Judges Dr. Suhadi SH mh, Supreme Court Justice, which was determined by the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court as the Chairperson of the Panel, Soesilo SM. MH. And Suharto SH. M. hum, Supreme Court Justice.

Substitute Clerk Agustina Dyah Prasetya Ningsih SH MH.

Connection SH’s view. The source told the media crew. Laurens Yahya deserves to be released because his actions were not proven.

The judge’s conscience as a substitute for God decided this case correctly. So is the decision of the Supreme Court cassation judge.

In any case, there is still a presumption of innocence. So don’t judge someone when.

(play)

Related Posts