Submitting Pretrial Motion Again, Hasto Asks for KPK Examination to be Postponed

JAKARTA, KOMPAS - The Secretary General of the Indonesian Democratic Party of Struggle, Hasto Kristiyanto, was supposed to be examined by the Corruption Eradication Commission on Monday (17/2/2025) as a suspect in a bribery case involving Harun Masiku and obstruction of investigation. However, Hasto requested that the examination be postponed. The reason is that Hasto is currently filing for another pretrial.

The Spokesperson for the Corruption Eradication Commission (KPK), Tessa Mahardhika Sugiarto, when contacted in Jakarta, Monday (17/2/2025), stated that Hasto is scheduled to be examined by the KPK investigation team this Monday. Hasto is being examined in his capacity as a suspect in a bribery case involving Harun Masiku and obstruction of investigation.

"It is true that HK (Hasto Kristiyanto) was summoned today in his capacity as a suspect," said Tessa.

We have filed for another pretrial after it was not accepted in the verdict last Thursday, which we believe should require two pretrial requests, not combined into one pretrial request.

Hasto's legal counsel, Ronny Talapessy, also confirmed the summons for his client. "Yes, there is a summons for Monday," he said.

However, Ronny continued, his party has sent a request letter for postponement of the examination to the KPK because they have now filed for another pretrial after the South Jakarta District Court decided not to accept Hasto's pretrial request on Thursday (13/2/2025).

"We have filed for a pretrial again after it was not accepted in the verdict last Thursday, which we believe requires submitting two pretrial requests, not combined into one pretrial request," said Ronny.

Ronny hopes that with the submission of these two pretrial applications, the judge at the South Jakarta District Court can examine the main issues of the pretrial that were not addressed in the previous pretrial decision.

Previously, Sole Judge Djuyamto decided not to accept Hasto's pretrial motion. Because, according to him, Hasto was a suspect in two cases, while the applicant did not clearly specify the invalidity of the suspect determination in which case. The judge did not touch and consider the evidence or witnesses in the trial.

"Judging, granting the exception from the respondent (KPK). Two, declaring the applicant's pretrial motion vague or unclear, declaring the applicant's pretrial motion inadmissible," said Djuyamto during the pretrial ruling hearing at the South Jakarta District Court, Thursday (13/2/2025).

The judge considered, after studying the petition and the applicant's response, Hasto was a suspect in two different crimes. However, the applicant's argument stated that the evidence used by the respondent was insufficient, even though it had been used in court and had permanent legal force.

On the other hand, there has not been a final court ruling that includes a decision on obstruction of investigation. There is only the bribery case involving the management of DPR members for the 2019-2025 period through the verdicts of Wahyu Setiawan and Agustiani Tio Fridelina.

Different types of cases will contain different evidence. Determination of the invalidity of initial evidence is considered inappropriate because it affects the judge's assessment. This is because there is a possibility that evidence is declared valid in one case, but invalid in another case.

"Because of these circumstances, the Judge is of the opinion that the applicant's application should be submitted in two pretrial applications, not in one application," said Djuyamto.

In addition, Djuyamto also assessed that the petitioner's arguments should be presented during the court trial of the case, not during the pretrial hearing. This is because the pretrial hearing does not have the authority to assess the substance or material of the criminal case. This includes whether or not a case is fit to proceed to trial.