What Happened During: Tuntutan Ditunda, Oditur Militer Hadirkan Saksi Ahli di Sidang Penyiraman Air Keras Andrie Yunus
What Happened During Military Court Session on Andrie Yunus’s Acid Attack Case
What Happened During the latest session of the military court in Jakarta saw the postponement of the formal reading of charges against Andrie Yunus, an activist from KontraS, due to the introduction of new expert witnesses. The proceedings, which had initially planned to proceed with the tuntutan (charge) reading, were delayed to accommodate additional testimonies. This decision reflects the court’s commitment to thorough investigation and the importance of expert evidence in determining the severity of the injury sustained by Andrie Yunus in the acid attack incident.
Expert Testimonies and Medical Evidence
What Happened During the court’s examination of the case highlighted the critical role of medical experts in providing clarity on the nature of Andrie Yunus’s injuries. Two specialists from Rumah Sakit Cipto Mangunkusumo (RSCM), Dr. Parintosa Atmodiwirjo, a plastic surgeon, and Dr. Faraby Martha, an ophthalmologist, were introduced to the proceedings. Both had been involved in treating Andrie Yunus since March 13, 2026, following the attack. Their testimonies are expected to detail the extent of the victim’s physical harm and any long-term consequences that may arise from the injury.
“Memang seyogianya hari ini adalah agendanya pembacaan tuntutan. Namun demikian, kami masih memerlukan saksi tambahan,” kata Oditur Militer dalam sidang, Rabu (20/5/2026). This statement underscores the necessity of incorporating expert opinions to ensure the accuracy of the legal narrative. The military prosecutors emphasized that the additional evidence would strengthen the case against the accused, particularly in establishing the impact of the acid attack on Andrie Yunus’s health.
What Happened During the presentation of the expert testimonies also revealed the court’s focus on the medical implications of the case. The presiding judge underscored the importance of the evidence in categorizing the injury as either minor or severe. “Kita ingin mengetahui apakah ini luka berat atau ringan, dan apakah akan memengaruhi kesehatan korban secara permanen,” ujar Hakim Ketua. The judge’s remarks suggest that the legal proceedings aim to be meticulous in assessing the physical and psychological damage caused by the attack.
Delays and Legal Process
What Happened During the court’s delay in reading the charges was attributed to the prosecutors’ need to gather more evidence. The military ombudsman, or oditur, had not been able to locate Andrie Yunus, who was undergoing intensive recovery after the operation. This absence was seen as a sign of the court’s empathy toward the victim. The delay also allowed for the inclusion of additional witnesses, including eight saksi (witnesses) scheduled for the next session, which will feature the testimony of Terdakwa I, Sersan Dua Edi Sudarko, who admitted to wanting to assault Andrie Yunus.
What Happened During the hearing also included discussions about the preparation of the evidence. Edi Sudarko mentioned that the liquid used in the attack, a karat remover, had been ready in a tumbler from the beginning of the investigation. This detail, presented during the session at Pengadilan Militer II-08 Jakarta, was scrutinized by the court to evaluate the accused’s intent and the conditions of the attack. The judge noted that the defendants lacked the capability of a professional intelligence officer in executing the incident.
Public and Legal Reactions
What Happened During the court proceedings has sparked debate among legal observers and the public. Novel, a representative of the KontraS organization, criticized the judge’s perceived bias toward the accused. “Kita bisa melihat bahwa persidangan justru cenderung membela para pelaku,” ujarnya. The criticism points to the broader implications of the case, especially since it was moved to the military court instead of the civilian court. This decision has raised concerns about the fairness of the trial and the representation of the victim’s interests.
What Happened During the session also brought attention to the potential violation of the Code of Ethics and Conduct for Judges (KEPPH). The prosecution’s request for additional witnesses was seen as a way to ensure transparency in the proceedings. With the inclusion of these testimonies, the court aims to provide a comprehensive understanding of the incident and its aftermath. The next session, scheduled for 13 Mei 2026, will see the formal appearance of Andrie Yunus, allowing for further cross-examination and evidence evaluation.