/data/photo/2020/07/30/5f22cc89a30d1.jpg)
[ad_1]
JAKARTA, KOMPAS.com – Anita Kolopaking diduga meminta success rate to Djoko Tjandra in the amount of US $ 200,000 or about Rs 2,970 million as legal aid services.
In the indictment filed in a trial at the Jakarta Central District Court Corruption Court on Wednesday (9/23/2020), Anita made the request during a meeting with Djoko Tjandra in Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia on November 19. of 2019.
At the same time, Anita submitted a power of attorney and an offer letter for legal assistance services that was finally approved by Djoko Tjandra.
“(Anita) submitted a document containing a power of attorney and a letter of offer for legal aid services containing legal aid services, Dr. Anita Dewi Anggraini Kolopaking requested 200,000 US dollars as success rate“Said the prosecutor through a live broadcast on the KompasTV YouTube account.
Also read: Prosecutor: Pinangki asks her husband to exchange Djoko Tjandra’s US dollars
“So Joko Soegiarto Tjandra agreed and signed the document,” he continued.
The meeting was also attended by the prosecutor Pinangki Sirna Malasari and a person named Rahmat.
At the meeting, Pinangki and Rahmat introduced Anita to Djoko Tjandra.
Pinangki had previously promised Djoko Tjandra that he would introduce a friend who is a lawyer to take care of Djoko Tjandra’s legal issues.
During the same meeting, Pinangki suggested that Djoko Tjandra be detained first by the prosecutor’s office.
“At the meeting on November 19, 2019, the defendant also informed Joko Soegiarto Tjandra that Joko Soegiarto Tjandra must first return to Indonesia and be detained by the Attorney General’s Office, then the defendant will deal with his legal issues,” he said.
Also read: Prosecutor Pinangki accused of receiving $ 500,000 from Djoko Tjandra for conspiracy of evil
Then, they discussed how to repatriate Djoko Tjandra by applying for a fatwa in the Supreme Court (MA) through the AGO.
The fatwa was arranged so that Djoko Tjandra was not executed in the case of transfer of collection rights (cessie) to Bank Bali so that he could return to Indonesia without serving a two-year sentence in that case.
After the plan to request a fatwa was drafted, Djoko Tjandra gave Pinangki an advance through an intermediary.
The face amount is US $ 500,000 or 50 percent of the promised total. Up to $ 100,000 of the total money is Anita Kolopaking’s share.
After receiving US $ 500,000 from intermediaries, Pinangki only gave Anita US $ 50,000.
The prosecutor revealed that Pinangki only gave Anita US $ 50,000 on the grounds that he had only received US $ 150,000.
Also read: Pinangki lawyer accused of layered articles, lawyer requested exception
“On the basis that the defendant had just received US $ 150,000 from Joko Soegiarto Tjandra,” he said.
“And if Joko Soegiarto Tjandra made his defects known, the defendant would give them back to Dr. Anita Dewi Anggraeni Kolopaking,” the prosecutor continued.
Meanwhile, the remaining $ 450,000 was used for Pinangki’s personal needs.
Pinangki bought a BMW X-5, paid for a beauty doctor in the United States, rented an apartment or hotel in New York, paid credit card bills, and paid rent for two apartments in South Jakarta.
Even though he had paid the advance, Djoko Tjandra later canceled his cooperation because none of the plans made by Pinangki and his colleagues to obtain the fatwa were carried out.
Also read: Prosecutor revealed, How much is lawyer Pinangki’s salary per month?
For your information, Anita is not a suspect in this case so far. However, Bareskrim Polri named him a suspect for another case that still involved Djoko Tjandra.
Meanwhile, in this case, Pinangki was charged by article 5 paragraph 2 in conjunction with article 5 paragraph (1) letter a of Law Number 31 of 1999 amended by Law Number 20 of 2001 on the Eradication of Corruption , subsidiary of article 11 of the Corruption Law.
Pinangki was also charged with the crime of money laundering (TPPU). Pinangki was charged with Article 3 of Law Number 8 of 2010 on ML Prevention and Eradication.
Finally, Pinangki was charged with criminal conspiracy and charged with article 15 in relation to article 5, paragraph (1) letter a, of article 15 of the Subsidiary Corruption Law together with article 13 of the Corruption Law.
