Former Chairman of the Corruption Eradication Commission (KPK) Firli Bahuri has withdrawn the pretrial lawsuit regarding the suspect status in the alleged extortion or acceptance of bribes.
“We would like to inform you that there are still deficiencies and imperfections in the application.” Therefore, we will make improvements and for the pretrial a quo which is expected to provide legal benefits,” said Firli Bahuri’s attorney, Ian Iskandar, at the South Jakarta District Court today.
Ian said the reason for the withdrawal was that improvements would still be made to the pretrial motion.
Moreover, the month of Ramadan was also one of the reasons for the withdrawal of the pretrial motion. “With this, we declare the withdrawal of the pretrial motion that we have registered with the South Jakarta District Court on March 12, 2025,” he added.
Then, the legal team of Polda Metro Jaya submitted the decision to the panel of judges regarding the response to the withdrawal of the pretrial motion. “We have all here heard what has been conveyed by the petitioner.” “We leave it to Your Honor the judge for the next steps,” said the Head of the Legal Division of the Metro Jaya Police, Kombes Leonardo Simarmata.
The judge will consider the request for the revocation of the pretrial.
Firli is known to have filed for a pretrial hearing three times, namely on November 24, 2023, January 22, 2024, and January 30, 2024.
Previously, the Special Criminal Investigation Directorate of the Metro Jaya Police was ready to face the pretrial lawsuit filed again by former Chairman of the Corruption Eradication Commission (KPK) Firli Bahuri regarding the suspect status in the alleged extortion or gratification case.
The South Jakarta District Court judge has also rejected the pretrial lawsuit against the Metro Jaya Police and the High Prosecutor’s Office regarding the failure to detain former Chairman of the Corruption Eradication Commission (KPK) Firli Bahuri.
The applicant’s argument is considered premature because the investigation lacks sufficient evidence or the incident does not constitute a criminal offense.
The judge assessed that there was no evidence supporting the petitioners’ claim that the investigation into the Firli Bahuri case was halted.
Leave a Reply