VZCZCXRO7527
OO RUEHCHI RUEHDT RUEHHM
DE RUEHJA #0897 0870914
ZNR UUUUU ZZH
O 280914Z MAR 07
FM AMEMBASSY JAKARTA
TO RUEHC/SECSTATE WASHDC IMMEDIATE 4079
INFO RUEHZS/ASSOCIATION OF SOUTHEAST ASIAN NATIONS IMMEDIATE
RUEHBY/AMEMBASSY CANBERRA IMMEDIATE 0590
RUEHPB/AMEMBASSY PORT MORESBY IMMEDIATE 3329
RUEHKO/AMEMBASSY TOKYO IMMEDIATE 0429
RUEHWL/AMEMBASSY WELLINGTON IMMEDIATE 1426
RHMCSUU/FBI WASHINGTON DC IMMEDIATE
RUEAWJB/DEPT OF JUSTICE WASHDC IMMEDIATE
RHHJJPI/USPACOM HONOLULU HI IMMEDIATE

UNCLAS JAKARTA 000897 
 
SIPDIS 
 
SENSITIVE 
SIPDIS 
 
FBI PLEASE PASS CTD/ITOS I, CTD/ITOS II, GOU 
STATE FOR EAP/MTS, DS/DSS, DS/IP/EAP, DS/EAP/ITA, AND 
CA/OCS/ACS 
 
E.O. 12958: N/A 
TAGS: PREL PGOV ASEC CASC KJUS PHUM ID
SUBJECT: JAKARTA HIGH COURT UPHOLDS VERDICTS IN TIMIKA CASE 
 
REF: 06 JAKARTA 013142 (WAMANG SENTENCED TO LIFE) 
 
¶1. (SBU) On March 7, the Jakarta High Court announced that it 
had upheld the Central Jakarta District Court's guilty 
verdicts (reftel) of Anthonius Wamang and his co-conspirators 
Agustinus Anggaibak (AKA Johnny Kasomol), Yulianus Deikme, 
Ishak Onawatme, Esau Onawatme, and Yairus Kiwak in connection 
with the 2002 murders of two American citizens and one 
Indonesian near Timika, Papua.  Wamang's life sentence 
stands.  The High Court availed itself of its perogative to 
extend the sentences of the co-conspirators.  Angaibbak and 
Deikme will now serve eight years, rather than seven.  Ishak 
Onawame, Esau Onawame, and Yairus Kiwak will now serve five 
years, as opposed to eighteen months.  Another 
co-conspirator, Hardi Sugimol, died in Jakarta Police 
Hospital from tuberculosis and AIDS-related complications 
last December 1.  The defendants' lawyers immediately 
announced that they would appeal again to the Supreme Court. 
 
¶2. (SBU) Prosecutors Anita Asterida and Fernando Siagian 
briefed us on these developments on March 27.  They told us 
that, as expected, the defendants' attorneys unsuccessfully 
challenged the original verdicts on procedural and political 
grounds.  They said that the appeal decision had been based 
on a review of existing evidence and documents, and that no 
public session had been held.  The same would likely be true 
of the appeal to the Supreme Court, although the court had 
the option to hold a trial if new evidence were introduced. 
They said they expected a Supreme Court ruling in about two 
months' time.  If the Supreme Court upholds the guilty 
verdicts, the defendants have no further appeal options. 
HEFFERN