VZCZCXRO3777
OO RUEHCHI RUEHDT RUEHHM
DE RUEHJA #9996 2201110
ZNR UUUUU ZZH
O 081110Z AUG 06
FM AMEMBASSY JAKARTA
TO RUEHC/SECSTATE WASHDC IMMEDIATE 8480
INFO RUEHZS/ASSOCIATION OF SOUTHEAST ASIAN NATIONS IMMEDIATE
RUEHPB/AMEMBASSY PORT MORESBY IMMEDIATE 3206
RHEHNSC/NSC WASHDC IMMEDIATE
RUEAWJB/DEPT OF JUSTICE WASHDC IMMEDIATE
RHHMUNA/USCINCPAC HONOLULU HI IMMEDIATE
RUCNFB/DIR FBI WASHDC IMMEDIATE

UNCLAS JAKARTA 009996 
 
SIPDIS 
 
SIPDIS 
 
FBI PLS PASS TO CTD/ITOS I, CTD/ITOS II, GOU 
SECSTATE FOR EAP/MTS AND DS/DSS, DS/IP/EAP, DS/EAP/ITA, AND 
CA/OCS/ACS 
 
E.O. 12958: N/A 
TAGS: PREL PGOV ASEC CASC KJUS ID
SUBJECT: TIMIKA TRIAL: DEFENSE FILES "EXCEPTION MOTION" 
 
REF: A. JAKARTA 8958 TIMIKA TRIAL OPENS 
     ¶B. JAKARTA 9697 TIMIKA TRIAL: DEFENDANTS 
        UNCOOPERATIVE 
 
¶1. (U) After several weeks of delay, the trial of the seven 
men accused of killing two Amcits in Timika, Papua in 2002 
took a small step forward as defense attorneys submitted a 
24-page "motion for exception" to the charges to the three 
judge panel.  Although essentially just another delay tactic, 
the submission of the motion does constitute a tacit 
acceptance of the judges' authority over the defendants, 
something that the defense has not previously acknowledged. 
Defense attorney Johnson Panjaitan of the Indonesian Legal 
Aid Society (PBHI) read the document, entitled "America Seeks 
Justice in Bandit Country," into the record.  The document 
ostensibly aims to convince the panel of judges to either 
throw out the indictments or to move the trial back to 
Timika. 
 
¶2. (U) The motion makes three main arguments, most of them 
familiar. First, the defense claims, the trial is simply a 
political show put on by the GOI according to the dictates of 
the U.S.  Second, they claim that the Central Jakarta Court 
is incompetent to try the case and that it should be returned 
to Timika.  Third, they claim the dossier submitted by the 
police investigators in the case does not conform to legally 
accepted standards.  Next week the prosecution will have an 
opportunity to reply to the motion for exception, and in two 
weeks the judges will make a decision as to whether to accept 
the defense motion or move on with witness examination. 
 
¶3. (SBU) According to a lawyer familiar with the case, the 
document filed by the defense is not really a legal motion at 
all, but rather a political statement intended to please the 
defendants and further delay the proceedings.  Our contact 
confidently predicted that the motion for exception would be 
denied and that the trial would progress to witness 
testimony.  We expect American witnesses to start being 
called in early to mid-September. 
PASCOE