The Attorney General’s Office (AGO) must go through a difficult process executing the decision of Reconsideration (PK) in the dispute between the State against Yayasan Supersemar, a foundation that belongs to the family of former President Soeharto. After facing the issue of expensive execution costs, the AGO has had to face a new hurdle after the panel of judges at the South Jakarta District Court partially granted the tort lawsuit filed by Yayasan Supersemar against the AGO. The lawsuit concluded with the statement that Yayasan Supersemar never received donations from State banks in the form U.S. dollar currency as accused in the PK. Will the South Jakarta District Court’s decision affect the execution process?
Yayasan Supersemar was founded by President Soeharto with the aim of helping outstanding students pay for their tuition. To facilitate this goal, President Soeharto issued the Government Regulation (PP) No. 15/1976 that basically required state-owned banks to deposit 50% of its 5% net profit to Yayasan Supersemar. Unfortunately, the money earned from many years of deposits was misused for the personal interests of President Soeharto and his closest people. After stepping down from power, many efforts were made to prosecute Soeharto and those close to him, but most of these efforts failed. The AGO then issued a decree of Termination of Prosecution (SKPP) against Soeharto because he had suffered what was believed to be a permanent state of illness. The AGO as the state advocate subsequently tried to find another way to restore the lost money and assets to the state and this resulted in a new civil lawsuit filed against Soeharto’s heirs and the Yayasan Supersemar.
On March 27, 2008, the South Jakarta District Court partially granted the lawsuit. Supersemar was ordered to compensate the state with US$105 million and Rp46 billion, but the Yayasan Supersemar were found solely guilty, while the heirs of Soeharto were found not guilty. This ruling was confirmed on the appelate stage on February 19, 2009. The Yayasan Supersemar filed for cassation thenafter to the Supreme Court, but the panel of cassation aggravated the penalty to US$315 million and Rp185 billion. According to the Supreme Court Decision No. 2896 K/Pdt/2009, Yayasan Supersemar had given US$420 million to Bank Duta. The records also showed that Yayasan Supersemar had given Rp13 billion to PT Sempati Air, an airline which is now bankrupt. In addition, the foundation also gave Rp150 billion to PT Kiani Lestari and PT Kiani Sakti; Rp12 billion to PT Kalhold Utama, Essam Timber and PT Tanjung Redep Hutan Tanaman Industri; and Rp10 billion to Kosgoro Business Group in late 1993. The panel of cassation, however, failed to notice the error of writing in the ruling. This typo made the decision unimplementable, forcing the AGO to file for PK in September 2013 in order to correct the typing error, but the PK petition was only granted on July 8, 2015.
Since then, the AGO had repeatedly attempted to carry out the execution order. But Yayasan Supersemar continued to mount their resistance. The foundation avoided three summons for aanmaning trial, and filed a new lawsuit against the AGO. And then the bailiff at the South Jakarta District Court, who is entitled to carry out the execution, said that the AGO had to pay Rp2.5 billion in costs before executions could be carried out. On June 28, 2016, the House of Representatives approved of the AGO’s proposal for additional funding to finance the execution. But on June 29, 2016, the panel of judges at the South Jakarta District Court issued the verdict that partially granted the tort lawsuit filed by Yayasan Supersemar against the AGO. In the case registered under case No. 783/PD.G/2015/PN JKT.SEL the panel of judges decided that Yayasan Supersemar never received donations from the state-owned banks as mentioned in the PK verdict. The Court stated that over the period of 1978-1998, Yayasan Supersemar only accepted donations from state-owned banks amounting to Rp309 billion and/or up to Rp706.2 billion. And these funds were distributed right on target.
The AGO has not responded to the development. But one thing is certain, the PK decision is already legally binding so that the execution should be conducted despite this new ruling. To date, however, the AGO has not yet published Yayasan Supersemar’s assets that could be confiscated, it is not known whether the value of said assets is sufficient to pay for the compensation. The next question is if the existing assets that can be tracked are not enough to compensate the State, what should the AGO do? We’ll see.
By Pradnya Paramitha
Copying, redistributing, and retransmitting this article is a violation of copyrights.
