Gayus Tambunan, Seven Years, and Justice Seen to be Done?

Gayus Tambunan, the corrupt tax official, received a sentence of seven years for his crimes. On hearing the verdict, Gayus thanked the judges for being fair and impartial, lambasted the incompetent and lying Legal Mafia Eradication Taskforce, and hinted that the CIA was involved in the process of helping him out.

The big question that most people are asking in the immediate aftermath of this decision is: "Was justice done and was justice seen to be done?" Perhaps the 'real' question is whether there is any difference in those two concepts; justice and justice seen to be done.

The prosecution demanded a sentence of 20 years. When one considers the scope of the fraud and the corruption that was alleged in this case, then 20 years was probably not a manifestly excessive request. So, a sentence of 7 years does seem to be on the light, the very light, side of the justice equation. This leads to the idea of justice being seen to be done. In this case, seven years leaves a bitter taste in one's mouth when there are others sent to prison for fraud and corruption cases that involved considerably less losses for considerably longer periods of time. Justice was not seen to be done in this case.

It is a foregone conclusion that the prosecution will appeal this verdict. Based on the 12 instructions issued by the president, it would be a toss-up as to whether the president would want this case to be an ongoing distraction. Perhaps, the Legal Mafia Eradication Taskforce will say "we have done our job and we are outta here...thanks for coming!" After all, the president said he wanted the Gayus case resolved, and it is. Although, the result is hardly a positive outcome for anyone but Gayus who would have been thinking that 20 years was a very real possibility.

Nevertheless, the real question for the president, for law enforcement officials, and to a lesser extent the community is "what happens next?" The reality is that the trial of Gayus Tambunan was a media circus, but in amongst all those shenanigans were some rather explosive allegations and counter-allegations. All of these allegations must be investigated and  'resolved'.

The companies that had dealings with Gayus need to be worried. The individuals that have had dealings with Gayus or who are in someway connected to him need to be worried. The biggest issue now facing the president is does he modify his instructions a little to demand that the KPK become the lead investigator on all these matters or does he let the corruption-tainted national police force continue to participate in a charade where public perception is clearly that the police are operating in a way to protect their own interests and their own people.

The reason this is such a test for SBY is that some of the companies involved are conglomerates owned by well-connected people with special interests that they will be seeking to remove from public scrutiny. The "biggie" now is does the president have the testicular fortitude to take these matters head on an exhibit some leadership to his people? Or, does he do as he has always done hand it off to one of his many minions so that he can later use "plausible deniability"?

But, getting back to the sense of justice and justice being seen to be done. The argument is really one about what is a legally sound judgment and what is a sound judgment with respect to public perceptions. Seven years does not satisfy the public perception of either justice or justice being seen to be done. In a strict legal sense, a seven-year sentence may in fact be fair in light of what the prosecution was able to prove regarding the indictment charged.

Finally, the statement by Gayus that intimated that the Legal Mafia Eradication Taskforce had provided assurances of certain conduct being undertaken and promises being made that were not fulfilled must also be investigated, particularly as this taskforce reports directly to the president and seemingly works at his discretion. Perhaps Gayus was misled into believing a promise from the taskforce was a promise from the president?

The CIA involvement angle may well become a side-show of some importance as it has the potential to distract from the real issues in the case. The US Ambassador, Scot Marciel, wasted no time in suggesting that the whole CIA claim was nothing more than an attempt to divert attention from other aspects of the case. But, then again, he would, wouldn't he?

Ho hum...next case!

The CIA Did It -- Abu Bakar Ba'asyir Speaks!

Abu Bakar Ba'asyir is never one for a dull moment. Some might like to describe the man as a radical or fundamentalist Muslim committed to the creation of a pan-Asian Caliphate at just about any cost, including providing support for terrorism. I certainly believe that the man is pro-terror, particularly where people are not prepared to accept what he says or come around to his way of thinking or world view.

However, he is also a bit of a conspiracy theorist it seems, and true to form he has determined that the most recent bombings at the JW Marriott and the Ritz-Carlton hotels in Jakarta were the work of the CIA. This is not the first time that the Head of the Jemaah Ashorut Tauhid, which is a rather loose coalition of Islamic groups keen to see a more universal adoption and implementation of Syariah Law, has blamed the CIA for bombings perpetrated in Indonesia.

In the aftermath of the Bali Bombings in 2002, in which he himself was implicated, he maintained that the bombings were not the work of Islam but of the CIA that was looking to discredit Islam. The claim was that based on the devastation at the Paddy Club in Bali that the bomb was a micro-nuclear device and that it was launched from a US warship off the coast of Bali.

By his own admission, Ba'asyir knows nothing about bombs or how to make them, but in his mind the only thing that makes sense is that the CIA has carried out the bombings as a means of sowing hate against Islam. The idea that Ba'asyir knows nothing is, at best, disingenuous.

Ba'asyir also addressed the issue of Jemaah Islamiyah and the belief that it has splintered into two factions. According to Ba'asyir the Jemaah Anshorut Tauhid is not a splinter group of Jemaah Islamiyah or of the Indonesian Mujahideen Council (Majelis Mujahideen Indonesia / MMI). As far as Ba'asyir knows, Jemaah Islamiyah is an Egyptian Muslim study group.

Never one to miss an opportunity, Ba'asyir added that the US and Australia will never defeat Islam and in fact they fear us ("us" I am guessing is Islam). He cites the fear that the US and Australia have of al-Qaeda, which he calls a small group. By my reckoning neither the US and Australia are trying to defeat Islam or make it subservient to some Western Christian ideal.

From a religious perspective Ba'asyir condemned the bombings as not being in accordance with Islam. The not in accordance with Islam part relies on the fact that there has been no formal declaration of war. To bomb "targets" without a formal declaration of war contravenes Islamic or Syariah law principles. Further, he goes on to say that the killing of innocent women and children is wrong even if these women and children are kafir.

However, this is moderated by "if they get involved, even in thought, then they must be killed". There does not seem to be any leeway on that front, and the idea that a mere thought is enough to warrant a killing opens the door to many killings as the idea of a thought seems so very discretionary.

If Ba'asyir did not have any followers and his Al-Mukmin Islamic Boarding School did not have such a long track record of breeding willing and able terrorists, the man would be nothing more than a distraction. However, he succeeds on both these points and this makes him a particularly dangerous man. This is sad because he so does not represent the majority of Indonesians or what Indonesia is about. There appears to be little doubt that there are quite a few Indonesians who wish that he stayed in exile in Malaysia.