Bali, Porosinformatif | Decision of the Supreme Court of the Republic of Indonesia No. 1935 K/PID.SUS/2021 “accepts” the request for Cassation from the Public Prosecutor (JPU) of the Attorney General’s Office of the Republic of Indonesia and a decision that has permanent legal force (incracht van gewijsde).
This automatically cancels the decision of the Central Jakarta District Court in Criminal Case No. 469/Pid. Sus/2020/PN Jkt Pst in the Banking Crime Case, on behalf of the “Victim” Rita K.K. Pridhnani/ PT Ratu Kharisma (Rita KK/PT RK) in the case of Police Report No. Pol. : LP/233/VI/2011/Bali/Directorate of Crime, 25 June 2011.
The reported parties in this case are Ningsih Suciati and 20 other people, consisting of the Board of Commissioners, the Board of Directors, Officers, leaders, and Employees of Bank Swadesi/BOII in a Collective Collegial manner, and the decision of the Supreme Court of the Republic of Indonesia’s Cassation Decision has become a breath of fresh air in enforcement law, legal certainty, and justice for customers and small communities who expect justice.
The decision of the Supreme Court of the Republic of Indonesia can be used as a new legal fact for PT RK to cancel the Execution Auction from the bank which contains elements of legal defects. “With the decision of the Supreme Court of the Republic of Indonesia No. 1935 K/PID.SUS/2021 which has permanent legal force (incracht van gewijsde), the executed auction conducted by the bank should be canceled by law,” said PT RK’s lawyer, Jacob Antolis, SH, MH, MM when contacted via his cellphone. Sunday afternoon (18/07) yesterday.
It is to be noted that with the decision of the Supreme Court of the Republic of Indonesia, it is reasonable to suspect that there has been a malicious conspiracy by auctioning off the execution of PT RK’s debtor’s collateral at an unreasonable and customary price and carried out at the lowest possible price, carried out by the suspect together with 20 people consisting of the Council Commissioners, Board of Directors, Officers, leaders, and Employees of Bank Swadesi/BOII in a Collegial manner, who have now been designated as suspects by the Police Headquarters investigator.
Lawyer PT RK, Jacob Antolis, S.H,M.H,M.M
According to PT RK’s lawyer, Jacob Antolis, SH, MH, MM, the Supreme Court’s decision is in line with the previous indictment and demands of the Public Prosecutor who also submitted P20 to the Economic and Special Crime Investigators at the Jakarta Police Criminal Investigation Agency. Cq. Head of Sub-Directorate of Banking.
Nevertheless, until now the investigators of Economic and Special Crimes at the Jakarta Police Criminal Investigation Agency Cq. The Head of the Banking Sub-Directorate led by Dirtipideksus Polri Headquarters is suspected of not carrying out his discretion or Misuse of his Directorate as stated in the “Precision” doctrine/Principle of the Indonesian National Police and also not implementing according to the sound of the Criminal Procedure Code based on objective and subjective authority.
Based on the legal facts that have been found, in particular, no evidence has been confiscated or secured by the investigators. Investigators also never wanted to issue a letter of ban, other legal remedies and or detention of 20 other suspects.
This case, based on Jacob’s explanation, had also been reported to Propam at the Bali Police. It is suspected that the actions of the police in this case have left the case adrift and unclear for about 11 years, until the complainant requested the Bareskrim Polri Headquarters to withdraw this case from the Bali Police.
After being handed over to the National Police Headquarters, it turns out that the investigators had named 20 more suspects and added one more suspect, namely the defendant Ningsih Suciati (Director of Bank of India Indonesia) who had received the Incraach decision from the Supreme Court by granting the Public Prosecutor’s Cassation.
Bank Responsibilities
Furthermore, he said, as a legal state, every citizen who feels his rights have been violated has the right to file a lawsuit/rebuttal to the court as a channel for his violated rights.
Likewise with PT RK. Jacob considered that Bank Swadesi/BOII found it difficult to evade the Supreme Court’s decision. Because the decision at the cassation level is actually an almost final decision.
In theory, jurisprudence is the decision of the Supreme Court judge that has permanent legal force. So, he said, this decision can be followed by judges or other judicial bodies in deciding cases or similar cases.
Every cassation decision in the Supreme Court is final. Because the consequences of this decision override the previous court decision. For example, defeating the decision of the high court and the district courts that are below it.
Furthermore, he said, banks must remain responsible because banks have full authority to supervise workers so that mistakes made by their workers against customers can be prevented. In accordance with the provisions of Law No. 8/1999 on the protection of
Bank customers as the party with a stronger position must prove that the procedures and systems are correct. “Supposedly, the customer as a victim of the bank’s negligence must return the customer’s rights in full, including the case experienced by PT RK,” he said.(Team)
