only accompanied the Defendant Mgs. Zainal Abidin bin Mgs. Mahmud Badaruddin on 23 December 20
ith spe ial po er of attor e . In addition to the lack of legal aid and lawyer availability, the quality of legal aid is also concerning.
On Gunung Sitoli District Court Decision No. 07Pid.B2013PN-GS, involving death convict Rusula Hia, and Decision No. 08Pid.B2013PN-GS, involving death convict Yusman Telaumbanua, the legal
counsel to both death convicts did not give any defense. The legal counsels, namely Laka Dodo Laila, SH, MH dan Cosmas Dohu Amazihono, SH, MH., even asked their client to be sentenced to death.
...Considering that in the defense the defendant admitted the mistake and asked the Panel of Judges to gi e the least pu ish e t, hile the defe da t’s legal ou sel asked the Pa el
of Judges to impose death sentence, considering whay they have done was ruthless and sadisti …
6. . The Use of Wit ess to Their Ow Case : Violatio of No -Self Incrimination Principle
Witness to their own case is one of the most reliable evidence possessed by the prosecutor as in several cases, the prosecutor is in lack of evidence material or witness to support their cases. In
death sentence cases, the Court should have the chances to verify various evidences to give the confidence for the judge before rendered the death sentence, and not only for fulfilling the formality
requirement. ICJR found that there are high number of cases where the defendant is forced to testify against his own cases, from 42 court decision researched by ICJR, 17 of it is determined base
on the testify of the defendant. In the Supreme Court Decision No. 2253 KPID2005 with Zulfikar Ali as the defendant, the
prosecutor called Gurdip Singh as the witness, in which Gurdip Singh was also involved in the same cases. In the cassation petition of Zulfikar Ali, it is stated that Gurdiph Singh is accepted to witness
against the death penalty charged to Zulfikar Ali as he was promised a leniency of the charges: ...Gurdiph “i gh as the ke it ess i this ase has re oked his testif a d de lared that he
was forced to mention the cassation applicant as the owner of the heroin as he was promised by the investigators a leniency of the criminal charged but latter was turned
do .. ICJR oted that the use of Wit ess to His O Case as the st ateg to
i g i to o fli t o e defenda
t ith othe s i hi h is ot o l fou d i the ase of ulfika Ali, ut also i the “up e e Court Decision No. 18.PKPid2007 with the case review applicant is Humprey Ejike a.k.a Doctor, the
advocate of Humprey delivered a letter from one of the withn ess i Hu p e ’s ase:
Affida it of it ess UGOCHUKINU IBIAM OKORO, dated Ju e urre t ser i g
imprisonment in Cipinang Correction Center, declared that KELLY is upset with the case review applicant as she suspect that the applicant was framing KELLY to get caught by the
police, the applicant is even is suspected as the person who gave information to the police on the involvement of KELLLY in drug cases, therefore she frame the applicant by instructing If
any to put store narcotics in a restaurant and report to the police for the applicant is arrested .
6.4. The Use of Investigator as Witness: Perpetuate the Violent Practice during Investigation
