Hasto's trial explained former MK judges about the lawyer as a witness to the defendant

Jakarta – Former Judge of the Constitutional Court (MK) Maruarar Siahaan was presented in a trial of alleged bribery of bribery of inter -time replacement members (PAW) members of the House of Masaraku Maskiku and the investigation with the defendant Hasto Kristiyanto. Maruarar explained about the lawyer who was a witness for the defendant. It was said by Maruarar who was a witness to relieve Hasto Kristiyanto. The hearing was held at the Jakarta Corruption Court on Thursday (6/19/2025). “For example, there is a client’s legal adviser in this case the criminal case of the defendant who is also a witness or expert in a hearing in a criminal case, according to the knowledgeable, what kind of legal consequences are legally criminal or ethical, perhaps the expert can explain it?” Ask the prosecutor. Browse to continue the content “Maybe I will just look at an evaluation of the information, all witnesses will be demanded in the oath and explain that no one other than the law, what he did, what he experienced, what he knew, as long as it was a testimony that could be measured by it, but on the other hand the party that was on the separate party,” Maruarar replied. “It is the greatest problematic to test the validity of what a Witness of the Public Prosecutor himself has been declared. The analogy in Die Burger, a witness who became a family until the third degree was not allowed because he would provide the assumption that was central to the will of the party, namely his family, this assumption could actually be tested by the judge, but without saying that he was banned in the size of a -AF. to look literature or relevant data, “Maruarar said. The prosecutor then asked Maruarar’s experience to face the hearing with a lawyer who was a witness or expert for his client. Maruarar claimed that he had never had this experience.” Defendant’s legal adviser to test in a case, as well as a witness or expert in the case he handled, and asked to ask for an expert explanation? “Asked the prosecutor.” I retired. Ask the prosecutor. Ask the prosecutor. of institutions associated with legal aid and searches can defeat the constitutional law. How can the expert view, can this soup be defeated the law from the constitutional side? “Ronny Talapessy asked. Maruarar then gave an explanation. Maruarar said that the internal soup hierarchy institution could not defeat the law, but if there was a doubt that it could subject a judicial overview. “Yes, I think that the regulation of the here, but if it cannot do. Bring if we were brought before the judiciary, of course we will give an argument about it, and as long as it is things supported in the provisions of the legislation,” Marurar also said. added. trees, “he said. Hasto was the defendant in a case of investigation into the investigation into an alleged bribery case with the suspected Harun Masiku. It is said that Hasto prevented the KPK from catching my refugee Harun, who has been on the refugee since 2020.