BA'ASYIR REVIEW MOVES FORWARD WITH AMROZI TESTIMONY

C O N F I D E N T I A L SECTION 01 OF 02 JAKARTA 002848 SIPDIS SIPDIS DEPT FOR EAP/MTS AND S/CT DOJ FOR CTS THORNTON, AAG SWARTZ FBI FOR ETTIU/SSA ROTH E.O. 12958: DECL: 03/03/2026 TAGS: PTER PREL PGOV KJUS KISL KVPR ASEC AS ID SUBJECT: BA'ASYIR REVIEW MOVES FORWARD WITH AMROZI TESTIMONY REF: A. JAKARTA 01142 JUDICIAL REVIEW CONTINUES WITHOUT SURPRISES ¶B. 05 JAKARTA 16933 COURT DELAYS RULING ON REVIEW ¶C. 05 JAKARTA 16515 LAWYERS FOR BA'ASYIR CLAIM "NEW EVIDENCE" ¶D. 05 JAKARTA 16215 BA'ASYIR SEEKS RELEASE ¶E. 05 JAKARTA 11125 INDONESIA COULD CUT PRISON SENTENCE ¶F. 05 JAKARTA 03026 BA'ASYIR CONVICTED Classified By: Political Officer Tim Hefner For Reasons 1.4 (b) and (d) Summary -------------- ¶1. (C) Convicted Bali bomber Amrozi testified on behalf of Jemaah Islamiyah (JI) Emir Abu Bakar Ba'asyir in the months-old Judicial Review request process (ref A). However, the results of his testimony have yet to reach the South Jakarta District Court, which scheduled its next session for March 8. After gathering all evidence for the review request, the court must submit its findings and a written opinion to the Supreme Court, which may then rule on the Judicial Review. Ba'asyir's defense attorneys continue to call for his immediate release and claim incorrectly that he should be freed June 1. Prison officials governing Ba'asyir's incarceration have stated that June 14 is the correct date. GOI prosecutors see little chance that Ba'asyir could stand trial a third time. End Summary. Amrozi Testifies -------------- ¶2. (C) At the direction of the South Jakarta District Court, the Cilacap District Court in Central Java, which holds jurisdiction over the Nusa Kembangan prison currently holding Amrozi, allowed him to testify in Cilacap on February 22 in support of Ba'asyir's requested Judicial Review. The South Jakarta District Court, which originally convicted Ba'asyir of "sinister conspiracy to cause a fire or explosion, resulting in deaths" (ref F),postponed its next judicial review session until March 8 pending the documentation on Amrozi's testimony in Cilicap. Senior Muslim Defense Team (TPM) attorney Achmad Michdan traveled to Cilacap on March 1 to review the written record of Amrozi's testimony. We have yet to obtain a copy. ¶3. (C) TPM has sought repeatedly to have Amrozi testify on Ba'asyir's behalf, but South Jakarta judges refused to allow the testimony without giving prosecutors the opportunity to argue against it. The criminal procedure code does not delineate the process by which witnesses may give testimony in a Judicial Review request. TPM has indicated in court documents that Amrozi would testify as to the veracity of statements he made in a March 24, 2005 letter previously submitted in the review process (ref B, C). In the letter, Amrozi claims that he never discussed the 2002 Bali bombing operation with Ba'asyir, a claim which contradicts testimony used to convict Ba'asyir in March 2005. (Comment: TPM submitted the same letter to the Appeals Court after Ba'asyir's March 3, 2005 conviction. The Appeals Court upheld Ba'asyir's conviction and sentence.) Supreme Court to Decide on Review -------------- ¶4. (U) Once the South Jakarta District Court has gathered all documents and evidence related to the Judicial Review request, the Court must draft an opinion on whether the criteria for a Judicial Review, either new evidence or judicial error, have been met. It must forward this opinion and all documented findings to the Supreme Court, which must decide whether the criteria for a Judicial Review have been met. If so, the Supreme Court will review the case and can ultimately uphold the conviction, reduce the sentence, or acquit the convicted individual (ref D). Release Date for Ba'asyir -------------- ¶5. (C) The Criminal Procedure Code does not clearly state how release dates are determined when remissions have altered JAKARTA 00002848 002 OF 002 sentence lengths (ref E). However, officials at Cipinang prison, where Ba'asyir currently serves his sentence, told Australian diplomats recently that they have determined Ba'asyir's release date to be June 14. TPM has demanded Ba'asyir's immediate release since the outset of the Judicial Review request process (ref C),and they have publicly claimed Ba'asyir's release date is June 1. Third ABB Trial Not Likely -------------- ¶6. (C) Prosecutors who have handled terrorism cases, including Salman Maryadi, the former lead prosecutor against Ba'asyir, have told us and our Australian counterparts on several occasions that they do not see a way to prosecute Ba'asyir a third time. They noted that with current evidence, they do not know of a crime that they could use to charge Ba'asyir, as most prosecutions link defendants to specific acts. Also, prosecutors have said that Indonesian law has a "double jeopardy" clause which would prevent the GOI from charging Ba'asyir again in connection with the 2002 Bali bombing. Additionally, prosecutors point to "political sensitivities" which would make a third Ba'asyir arrest extremely difficult for the GOI to undertake. Comment -------------- ¶7. (C) With just over three months left in Ba'asyir's prison term, the Judicial Review request process continues at a slow pace, and several steps remain before the Supreme Court makes a ruling. The admission of Amrozi's testimony does not indicate that the courts have moved closer to prematurely releasing Ba'asyir. Although high-profile CT initiatives have abated somewhat after the flurry of attention following the killing of JI master bombmaker Azahari, political winds still favor holding the line in CT. With Ba'asyir's second prison stay almost over, only a complete acquittal and repudiation of his conviction would strike a serious blow to GOI CT efforts. Regardless of the outcome, TPM will continue to use the Judicial Review as a public relations vehicle for Ba'asyir until his release. PASCOE