Jakarta –
Diversion conference matter AG (15), girlfriend of Mario Dandy Satriyo (20), in the case of assaulting David Ozora (17) will certainly end in a deadlock. Party David want the legal process to continue to the main case.
The South Jakarta District Court (Jaksel) had previously received the delegation of case files AG. The court had initially appointed South Jakarta District Court Chief Saut Maruli Tua Pasaribu to be the sole judge for the trial AG.
“It’s true, today is Friday, March 24, 2023, a juvenile criminal case has been delegated, with the initials Defendant AG by the South Jakarta District Attorney. Which after being studied by the Head of the District Court, the Head of the District Court has appointed a single judge to handle juvenile criminal cases. said the South Jakarta District Court Public Relations official, Djuyamto, to journalists, Friday (24/3).
However, the single judge in the AG case has now been replaced by judge Sri Wahyuni. Djuyamto said the first diversion stage for AG would be carried out on Wednesday (29/3) today.
“The single judge has set the stages of diversion as stipulated in Article 52 of Law No. 11 of 2012 concerning the Juvenile Criminal Justice System, namely by scheduling March 29, 2023 as the first diversion deliberation stage,” he added.
Diversion Process
The AG case diversion process will be held closed. Only a number of invited parties can attend the diversion meeting.
“If the diversion remains closed, it will only be attended by parties who were invited in the diversion process,” said South Jakarta District Court Public Relations official Djuyamto to journalists, Tuesday (28/3).
To note, diversion deliberations in the juvenile justice system is the settlement of child crimes through the concept of dialogue between all parties so that it becomes a very important consideration in resolving criminal cases in promoting restorative justice.
Back to Djuyamto’s statement. He appealed to David’s side to make a firm statement at today’s diversion meeting. He said AG’s trial schedule would be held if David’s side refused to settle down, so the diversion was declared a failure.
“Later the deliberation will be invited by the defendant’s family, their parents, the victim. The attitude of the victim is the main factor. Because after all, in diversion, if the victim’s family is close to solving it peacefully, there is no diversion. But that must be stated in the deliberation. The diversion. For what reason, there will be made an official report on the implementation of the diversion. Who will be present, what is the attitude of the victim’s family, it is written firmly. Even if it is verbal you can. Or then there is a clear statement that is better,” Djuyamto said.
“If it’s like that, of course diversion cannot be carried out, meaning that the diversion stage has failed. The diversion stages have been ruled out. Only in the end will a trial date be set,” he added.
He said there was a possibility that the AG diversion would be held again if David’s party was not present at tomorrow’s diversion. He explained that David’s statement was an important factor in determining the success or failure of the diversion.
“The judge could say that it will not be rescheduled but in practice it will still be rescheduled, because of his absence, we don’t know yet, what is his absence? Is it because of obstacles that he cannot attend and so on, because the most important thing is a statement of attitude. Even if he is not present but a letter arrives, which is received legally, for example there is a power of attorney or his family doesn’t come but the legal adviser does come, that’s okay. called again,” he said.
He said, if the diversion is successful, it will be included in the decision of the head of the court. However, if the diversion fails, it will only be stated in the minutes.
“If the diversion is successful, then there is the name of the diversion agreement, it will later be included in a decision by the head of the court. But if it fails, then it is not necessary to make an official report,” he said.
Furthermore, Djuyamto explained that AG’s diversion deliberations at the court stage would still be carried out even though David’s party had refused to settle the matter at the investigation and prosecution stages. This is based on Article 52 of Law No. 11 of 2012 concerning the Juvenile Criminal Justice System.
“Because there is an obligation in Article 52 of Law No. 11 of 2012 to go through the diversion process first. There are three levels of diversion, in the investigator there is, in the public prosecutor there is. Even though the investigator has done it and the victim’s family doesn’t want it, the victim’s family is prosecuted If you don’t want it, it’s in court, does the judge not make a mediation schedule? You still have to make a mediation schedule because that’s a statutory order,” he said.
Read the complete news on the next page
(knv/knv)
