Bali Bombers Could Go Free
RyoOhki
Join Date: 2003-01-26 Member: 12789Members
Join Date: 2003-01-26 Member: 12789Members
in Discussions
<div class="IPBDescription">Indonesian supreme court ruling</div> <a href='http://www.news.com.au/common/story_page/0,4057,10222073%255E401,00.html' target='_blank'>News link</a>
<!--QuoteBegin--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> THE smiling bomber, Amrozi, is expected to appeal against his death-row sentence after a top court ruled the law used to convict him was unconstitutional.
In a majority 5-4 decision, Indonesia's constitutional court ruled retrospective anti-terror laws used to convict several of the bombers were "against the spirit" of Indonesia's constitution.
The ruling could throw all trials of convicted Bali bombers into doubt.
"The law ... about fighting terrorism used in the Bali bombing has no legal binding power," the decision statement said.
The case was lodged with the court by lawyers for Masykur Abdul Kadir, who was last year jailed for 15 years for helping the Bali bombers by providing transport and accommodation.
Masykur, the only Bali native involved in the attacks, challenged the sentence, arguing the use of retrospective laws was illegitimate.
His lawyers, who also represent death row Bali bomber Amrozi, said they would lodge more appeals if their case was successful, including an appeal by Amrozi.
The October 12, 2002, blasts on the Indonesian resort island killed 202 people, including 88 Australians, and have been blamed on the al-Qaeda-linked Jemaah Islamiah regional terror group.
Lawyers for Masykur appealed on the grounds that the laws used to convict him were passed after the attacks took place, rendering his conviction invalid.
Indonesia's 1945 constitution states that laws cannot be applied retroactively.
Earlier, Wiranan Adnan, a lawyer from a team that has defended most of the Bali bombers, said if the appeal was successful trials would need to be held again.
All those found guilty were convicted using tough anti-terror laws rushed through parliament in the months after the attacks. The laws gave investigators broader powers and allowed for the death penalty.
Adnan said that if the appeal was accepted then lawyers would demand that police reinvestigate all the men and seek convictions based on the Indonesian criminal code.
He said they would remain in jail if any reinvestigation was ordered.
Three of the 32 people convicted over the Bali bombings have been sentenced to death, while 29 others have been sentenced to between three years and life imprisonment.
Most have appealed to the Supreme Court. It has already rejected an appeal filed by Amrozi bin Nurhasyim, who was sentenced to death. He can still appeal for a judicial review and a presidential pardon.
The Constitutional Court was established last year. It has the authority to rule on cases related to the constitution and the application of the law. <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Discuss.
<!--QuoteBegin--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> THE smiling bomber, Amrozi, is expected to appeal against his death-row sentence after a top court ruled the law used to convict him was unconstitutional.
In a majority 5-4 decision, Indonesia's constitutional court ruled retrospective anti-terror laws used to convict several of the bombers were "against the spirit" of Indonesia's constitution.
The ruling could throw all trials of convicted Bali bombers into doubt.
"The law ... about fighting terrorism used in the Bali bombing has no legal binding power," the decision statement said.
The case was lodged with the court by lawyers for Masykur Abdul Kadir, who was last year jailed for 15 years for helping the Bali bombers by providing transport and accommodation.
Masykur, the only Bali native involved in the attacks, challenged the sentence, arguing the use of retrospective laws was illegitimate.
His lawyers, who also represent death row Bali bomber Amrozi, said they would lodge more appeals if their case was successful, including an appeal by Amrozi.
The October 12, 2002, blasts on the Indonesian resort island killed 202 people, including 88 Australians, and have been blamed on the al-Qaeda-linked Jemaah Islamiah regional terror group.
Lawyers for Masykur appealed on the grounds that the laws used to convict him were passed after the attacks took place, rendering his conviction invalid.
Indonesia's 1945 constitution states that laws cannot be applied retroactively.
Earlier, Wiranan Adnan, a lawyer from a team that has defended most of the Bali bombers, said if the appeal was successful trials would need to be held again.
All those found guilty were convicted using tough anti-terror laws rushed through parliament in the months after the attacks. The laws gave investigators broader powers and allowed for the death penalty.
Adnan said that if the appeal was accepted then lawyers would demand that police reinvestigate all the men and seek convictions based on the Indonesian criminal code.
He said they would remain in jail if any reinvestigation was ordered.
Three of the 32 people convicted over the Bali bombings have been sentenced to death, while 29 others have been sentenced to between three years and life imprisonment.
Most have appealed to the Supreme Court. It has already rejected an appeal filed by Amrozi bin Nurhasyim, who was sentenced to death. He can still appeal for a judicial review and a presidential pardon.
The Constitutional Court was established last year. It has the authority to rule on cases related to the constitution and the application of the law. <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Discuss.
Comments
You think that if you were prosicuting someone for such acts, that you would make sure there were no loop holes. Im not familiar with their constitution, but it sounds like they are going to be retried as criminals. Does 202 acounts of murder get you a death-row sentence in Bali? If they do go free, I can easily see their being freed used as a recruitment tool.
The main point in this is that they retroactivly used a set of laws (and in doing so violated their constitution), something that can have horrible repercusions.
As I don't know the full story (ie what laws they would be tried under now) I am going to assume that they will still all end up back in prison for the rest of their lives (I hope).