Why Aseng Not Getting Public Support As Ever Given to Prita?

Why Aseng Not Getting Public Support As Ever Given to Prita?

Before the case of Prita Mulyasari vs Omni International Hospital (2009) sticking out and being crowded in public, and had the full support of the community, in fact the previous three years, there have been similar cases, but somehow much less public attention. The mass media also does not seem eager to expose this case as it did in the case of Prita.
As we already know Prita vs Omni International Hospital in Tangerang was excited Pritchard originated from a complaint against the hospital services were written and sent to friends via e-mail, which became widespread. Omni International Hospital is not received, they reported to the police with allegations Pritchard defamation.
In 2009 the mass media also expose it out of the case. Cash received considerable public attention, which is a crowd support action against Prita, and harshly criticized the Omni International Hospital. Various actions undertaken to support Prita in cyberspace (Face Book support), as well as in the real world (coin collecting support Prita movement). Even to draw perhatianpara legislators, state officials, and the candidate's time (knowingly when it ahead of the presidential election in 2009).
In 2006, three years before the case of Prita, Khoe Seng Seng (Aseng), an owner of commercial traders in ITC Mangga Dua, Jakarta, suffered the same fate when writing letters to the editor complaining about the status of the land he bought. Aseng judge he had been lied to by the developer. The developer does not receive, and demanded Aseng criminal or civil, because they have committed criminal defamation, and unlawful act. The difference, as I said above, almost no media interest in exposing the case. Likewise the community, nobody was interested to support the movement as happened in the case of Prita vs Omni International Hospital. Even when the decision to the Supreme Court (in its civil case) published on January 22, 2013 that menyatakn Aseng still guilty, and must pay compensation to the Duta Pertiwi Rp. 1 billion, no media, and the public who are interested in supporting the movement Asung of unfair legal treatment it.
When compared with the case of Prita, actual vs. Duta Pertiwi Aseng case is clearer and stronger conjecture that Aseng actually been a victim of the power of big business money and mafia law. While the case of Prita vs Omni still debatable, although the truth is in the Pritchard.
Aseng case vs Duta Pertiwi (developer of the Sinar Mas Group) begins when the reader letters published in two national dailies. Each Kompas Daily, 26 September 2006 under the title "Duta Pertiwi Liar." It was about ketidaktransparan Duta Pertiwi parties on the status of the land he sold it. And, in the Voice Reform, 21 November 2006, with the title of "scream owner Kiosk ITC Mangga Dua." It was about Rp financial penalties. 100,000 per day is charged to the owner of the kiosk at ITC Mangga Dua, if they do not want to pay the renewal fee to the city government.
Aseng admitted after 18 years of buying rukonya it, he just knew that the land status was not informed of the HGB as Duta Pertiwi rukonya houses when selling it (HGB at Hak Milik land Duta Pertiwi). He did not know the actual status of the land when they wanted to extend his HGB, it turns out the status of the land is not on land rights HGB PT Duta Pertiwi as informed earlier, but rather Rights Management (HPL), owned by the city government.
Two letters to the editor Aseng was denied in each of the Compass, by the Duta Pertiwi. While in Voice Reform, in dispute by the Real Estate Division of Sinar Mas Group.
Not satisfied, they also memperkara Aseng criminally by reporting to the Police Headquarters on charges of criminal defamation (Article 310 of the Criminal Code), the case is heard in the East Jakarta District Court, and also sue civilly for allegedly has committed an unlawful act (Article 1365 of the Civil Code), with claims for compensation amounting to Rp. 17 billion, on trial in the North Jakarta District Court.
In the lawsuit Aseng two convicted. For criminal cases he was sentenced to six months in prison with one year probation. and in civil cases fined Rp. 1 billion in civil cases.
On appeal, the Jakarta High Court judge granted an appeal Aseng. However, the Duta Pertiwi filed an appeal to the Supreme Court, which resulted in the victory of Duta Pertiwi on January 22, 2013 (Civil cases), and March 22, 2013 (Criminal cases). Aseng were defeated in PK's decision in cash required to pay a fine of Rp 1 billion. Aseng states parties will file a judicial review on the decision of the Supreme Court which is considered very strange and unfair.
Moreover, not only he who wrote letters like that, but there are a total of 19 people were also doing essentially the same thing with him. They feel cheated by the property company Sinar Mas Group on the status of the land he bought. Which was the land owned by the city government (Right to Manage), not land owned property company Sinar Mas Group (HGB) as informed earlier.
People who write letters to the editor was also reported by the company Sinar Mas Group as it did against Aseng (defamation), but they were all released, due to be heard by a different judge.
Only Aseng who had the misfortune heard by the panel of justices led by Justice Imron Anwari, with members Suardi Judge, and Judge P Manurutng East.
Which should greatly appreciated Aseng that it is a struggle to fight against the injustice itself felt in this case since 2006, or was 7 years ago. Previously, Aseng admitted that he had reported allegations of mafia law in the case to the Police Headquarters, the Presidential Advisory Council (Wantimpres), National Human Rights Commission, the Judicial Commission (KY), Judicial Mafia Eradication Task Force, the Ombudsman, and the Commission III, but no none of the agencies are following up the report.
Even the mass media and the public were not impressed tertarikuntuk expose this case and the mass support as experienced by Pritchard, against Omni International Hospital, Tangerang.
The LBH is the one who has been given legal aid to Aseng who claims not afford to pay compensation amounting to Rp 1 billion, even if able, he will not pay because it was totally innocent. What he wrote two letters, he said is a fact, not slander. The proof, in the same case, there are 18 people besides him, who also received a report from the developer's Sinar Mas Group to Police Headquarters and charged with a civil defamation claims, but they are all free. Why is he alone convicted?
Because of his persistence that in 2009, Aseng awarded "Tasrif Award" from the Alliance of Indonesian Journalists (AJI). Aseng assessed deserve credit for having contributed to the fight for freedom of speech and the rights of consumers through letters to the editor. Aseng not only defend themselves, but is also considered to represent the rights of other consumers who suffered the same fate.
This case again sticking to the surface when Aseng once again showed his determination to obtain a fair trial with another reader wrote in Kompas, which was published in Kompas edition of Wednesday, April 29, 2013, with the title "Developer Antrikritik, Consumer sued."
Aseng give warning to us all, lest bodo future with this case, because any time we could suffer the same fate with him.
Which makes Aseng wrote letters to the compass again, most likely due to a warning letter from the North Jakarta District Court to Aseng to immediately pay compensation amounting to Rp 1 billion as was decided by the Supreme Court.
According to Kompas.com (02/06/13), the development of the civil case until now in the process of mediation to a letter of warning to the North Jakarta District Court to pay compensation Aseng it. The second mediation will take place on June 10, 2013 to hear the answer of the Sinar Mas Group.
Persistence Aseng legal fight for justice for him for seven years it finally began to produce results after the contrast also began giving support to Aseng. Moreover, the Judicial Commission (KY) also finally started to move to examine the three judges hearing the case.
Assembly comprising Chief Justice Judge Imron, East and Suardi, and a few other problematic justices it shall be examined by the Judicial Commission since February 2013.
Apparently, the trio of judges is also problematic in other cases that have been decided them. In addition to this Aseng cases, they will also be examined by the investigation team for the case of KY Review (PK) with K Chimezie Hillary drug defendant, and the defendant's case PK Hanky ​​Gunawan, owner of ecstasy factory in Surabaya. For this Hanky ​​case, the panel of judges headed by Chief Justice glorious Achmad Imron Yamanie with its members and the East.
In the case of Hillary and PK Hangky it, there it is considered odd, because without a strong legal considerations, the Supreme Court annulled the death sentence the two defendants drug, replaced with each only 12 years imprisonment and 15 years.
For the case of PK Hangky, KY and MA has imposed sanctions on Chief Justice Ahmad Yamanie because it proved to Hangky PK change the content of the supposed 15 years in prison to 12 years in prison.
Other great judges who turned out to be not that great wait his turn, including three grand JUDGE who decided the case Aseng, the Imron Anwari, Suardi, and P Manurutng East.
Of chronological Aseng case of this, look, when compared with Prita, what is experienced by the Aseng heavier and more serious. For seven years, from 2006 until now Aseng fight alone, though assisted by LBH and contrast, but somewhere in the mass media ever so eager exposing Prita vs Omni International Hospital. Even so with the community / public. Where are their voices ever so eager to give support to Pritchard?
Likewise, the famous lawyers ever scrambling to deal with the case of Prita vs Omni International Hospital. Why are not interested in giving legal aid to Aseng?
Whatever reason, they did not seem all that interested in doing the same thing to Aseng?
We at Kompasiana also do not take lightly or do not care about the fate of this Aseng, because if the law is misguided phenomenon is left, and then became jurisprudence, the writings of our opinion in an opinion Kompasiana real and potentially criminalized any criticism. Later kompasianer potentially will suffer the same fate with Aseng. Freedom of speech in the media (the internet) is threatened. ***
Source reading: