Junimart's 12-year demands for Eliezer have not fulfilled a sense of justice

Political analyst Junimart Girsang of the PDIP believes that the 12-year prison sentence demanded of Richard Eliezer Pudihang Lumiu (Bharada E), one of the defendants in the premeditated slaying of Nofriansyah Yosua Hutabarat (Brigadir J), does not satisfy his sense of justice. This is due to the fact that Eliezer committed his crimes against his friends who were the victims without any consideration for other people, among other reasons.

The accused Ferdy Sambo and bharada richard eliezer should face the same charges, according to the former member of Commission III of the Indonesian House of Representatives. Because the Public Prosecutor (JPU) should adhere to the article being charged, namely article 340 of the Criminal Code, continued the former head of the Honorary Court of the DPR RI Council.

"We must look at the facts that were admitted at trial and are consistent with one another. Because of this, JC's philosophy is to prevent the soul in question from feeling safe and secure when he candidly discloses what actually occurred, according to Junimart.

According to the politician from North Sumatra, it has been established that Richard Eliezer was not under the influence of drugs or alcohol at the time of his actions and that there was no justification for them. Following that, the prosecution by the prosecutor was subpar and the context was unclear.

"Therefore, I question the prosecutor's request for a 12-year sentence. "Junimart said the Deputy Chairperson of Commission II stated that the Witness and Victim Protection Agency (LPSK) should not intervene in the course of the trial process and react to the high and low levels of the prosecutor's demands and court decisions. The Deputy Chairperson of Commission II stated that the Witness and Victim Protection Agency (LPSK) must put aside considerations of subjectivity in deciding this case based on the facts that we examined, followed during the trial.

Ethics Independence needs to be upheld, people need to respect one another, and opinions aren't necessary. Junimart concluded by saying, "All are equal before the law, make the law the commander-in-chief." Earlier, the Public Prosecutor (JPU) had asked for the defendant Richard Eliezer Pudihang Lumui alias Bharada E to receive a 12-year prison sentence.

He was the one who shot Brigadier J. One of the five defendants in the alleged premeditated murder of Brigadier J is Bharada E.

"We demand that the South Jakarta District Court panel of judges who heard the case and deliberated on it decide to impose a 12-year prison term on the defendant Richard Eliezer Pudihang Lumui. and shorten incarceration terms.

The prosecutor said that the judge "ordered the defendant to remain in custody.". The defense attorney believed Bharada E was responsible for killing Brigadier J.

The Criminal Code's Article 340 and Article 55, paragraph (1), first were both deemed to have been broken in the indictment by Bharada E. The prosecutor declared, "Richard Eliezer Pudihang Lumui has been proven legally and convincingly guilty of committing the crime of taking lives simultaneously.".

There were a number of elements in the charges brought by the Public Prosecutor that reduced the punishment for Bharada E. One of them is prepared to work with investigators to find cases involving numerous people.

The mitigating circumstances. The prosecutor stated that the defendant "was a witness to the perpetrators who collaborated to uncover this crime.".

Additionally, he claimed Bharada E had never received a penalty and had been cooperative and polite throughout the course of the case's trial. The victim's family has pardoned the defendant for his actions, he said, adding that the defendant regrets what he did.

In the meantime, the aggravating circumstances in Bharada E's 12-year charge for participating in and carrying out the shooting of Brigadier J. "The aggravating factors that we considered when submitting a crime were factors.

Nofriansyah Yosua Hutabarat, the victim, lost her life as a result of the defendant's negligence as the executor, the prosecutor claimed. Brigadier J believes that Bharada E's actions caused the victim's family the greatest sorrow, in addition to everything else.

Not only that, but his actions are also thought to have stirred up widespread commotion and unrest in the neighborhood. "Declaring that Richard Eliezer, with the identity mentioned above, has been legally and convincingly proven to have committed the crime of taking the lives of people collectively as stipulated and threatened with a criminal charge in primary violation of Article 340 Juncto Article 55 paragraph 1 to 1 of the Criminal Code," the prosecutor said in his closing statement.

(RO/OL-1).

"Declaring that Richard Eliezer, with the identity mentioned above, has been legally and convincingly proven to have committed the crime of taking the lives of people collectively as stipulated and threatened with a criminal charge in primary violation of Article 340 Juncto Article 55 paragraph 1 to 1 of the Criminal Code," the prosecutor said in his closing statement.