SULTENG,- CENTRAL Sulawesi Police for Special Criminal Investigations Directorate got pretrial of Justice from contractor, Ibrahim Salim ST. This is because the case submitted by the Police has not been completed since October 2014, according to LP / 542 / X / 2014 / Police of Central Sulawesi on October 6, 2014 by appointing the Petitioner as a suspect. As a result of the stipulation, the applicant cannot run his company as a partner (contractor / service provider).
In accordance with the information submitted to the editor of kailipost.com, the petitioner is the winner of the auction for development work on the street of Gajah Mada Palu by Pokja development Ruko dated August 12, 2013 then. This is supported by the contract between the power budget user as PPK Cipta Karya field on Public Works Department of Donggala with Sartika Hafifa Perdana company.
The main objection; the applicant has completed the work in accordance with the contract and completed 100 percent and has been handed over to the Donggala Government. On the job, April 30, 2014, Audit Board of Republic Indonesia’s examination was found there is a lack of volume of work worth Rp99,994 million and Rp97.0 million and late penalties of Rp118 million. Based on the findings of the Audit Board of RI, the Petitioners have returned to the State Cases according to the evidence of their deposit dated May 7, 2014 and May 05, 2014 and May 05, 2014 respectively to the account of Regional Government at BNI bank.
Apparently, local police called the applicant according to his summons S.Pgl / 73 / III / 2015 / Directorate of Special Crime Investigation dated March 30, 2015, alleged corruption crime over the construction of Donggala Regency buildings. On that basis, the defendant shall conduct an investigation on 08 October 2014. Based on that, the defendant did not conduct any investigations in accordance with the Criminal Code and the Police Chief No. 14 of 2012 on the Management of the Criminal Investigation article 15.
“If the requested Party has requested the expert’s explanation, but the expert is not authorized to calculate the loss of the state, it is based on the decision of the Constitutional Court above the preliminary evidence, sufficient initial proof and sufficient evidence in the article! the number 14, article 17 and Article 21 paragraph (1) of the Criminal Code by the Constitutional Court shall be interpreted as at least two evidences possessed by the defendant in the case of the appointment of the applicant as a suspect. “Such is the claim of the applicant’s Pretrial Act.
Based on that, the applicant states; that the determination of a suspect violates human rights because the presumption of innocence becomes unclear. Second; demanding legal certainty. Third; state administrative bodies/officials are prohibited from committing abuse of authority. The Pre-Judicial Session was presided over by judge Dede Salim, SH MH at the Palu District Court.**
Reporter: Andono Wibisono
