JAKARTA - The Supreme Court has made headlines by rejecting the appeal from eight prisoners involved in the notorious Vicana-Makin murder case, causing ripples of reactions among those familiar with the case.
The decision, announced on December 16, sends a clear message about the court's stance on the evidence presented and the abilities of the initial trial judges. According to Yant, the Supreme Court spokesman, one of the key factors behind this rejection was the confirmation of no errors made by the original judges during the trial process. "The consideration behind the Supreme Court's decision to deny the PK is based on the facts and absence of negligence of the judges involved," Yant reported.
The eight prisoners - Saka Tatar, Jay, Spriyanto, Eka Sandy, Hadi Saputra, Eko Ramadhani, Sudirman, and Rivaldi Aditya Wardana - had filed for judicial review (PK), but the Supreme Court found the new evidence they submitted to be redundant and not under the specifications of new evidence as defined by Criminal Procedure Law.
Reflecting on the ruling, Reza, the lawyer representing the victim’s family, expressed little surprise. "I was sure the PK would be rejected. The evidence shows this was premeditated murder," he said, indicating the family's conviction about the severity and nature of the crime.
Reza has underscored the point of view of the victim's family, emphasizing their belief not just about the murder aspect but also the alleged accompanying crime of rape. "The family believes this case involves both planned murder and rape," he stated. Such claims add layers of complexity and weight to the already grim narrative surrounding the Vicana-Makin case.
Despite the court’s ruling not going the way they would have hoped, the victim's family has chosen to respect the legal rights of the prisoners to pursue their appeal. Reza made it clear: "They respect the prisoners’ right to take legal action, but they will not pursue additional legal remedies." This reflects the familial focus on closure and respect for legal processes, even if outcomes are not as hoped.
The Supreme Court's decision also has lasting implications for the convicted prisoners. With the PK rejection, the previous criminal verdicts rendered by lower courts remain intact. For Saka Tatar, this means he will serve his sentence of eight years, having already spent 3 years and 8 months, which places his potential release around July 2024, barring any other legal interventions.
This pivotal moment has underscored the Indonesian legal system’s processes and has sparked discussions on how the justice system manages complex and emotionally charged cases like Vicana-Makin. It opens up questions about the depth of evidence considered and the family’s role within the judicial framework.
Though the burden of the case weighs heavily on both the victim's family and the culprits, the system's operation proceeds, illustrating the nuances of justice being served and continually sought after.
For now, the Vicana-Makin murder case remains emblematic of the challenges faced within the Indonesian legal system, as families of victims grapple with their sense of justice and the accused attempt to overturn verdicts they deem unfair.
Being subject to both media scrutiny and public opinion, the individuals involved will undoubtedly remain fixtures within the discourse on criminal justice and reform.
