Febrie Adriansyah Highlights Judge's Contradictions After Pretrial Ruling Rejected
10 Articles
10 Articles
The judge rejected Febrie Adriansyah's pretrial motion, even though his attorney was confused by the ambiguity of the legal considerations.
This principle teaches that if the suspect's rights are not conveyed by law enforcement officers, then the legal process carried out can be declared null and void.
Having filed a pretrial motion twice, former Jampidsus Febrie Adriansyah had to accept decisions that were not as expected.
A South Jakarta District Court (PN Jaksel) judge again rejected a pretrial motion filed by Febrie Adriansyah, former Deputy Attorney General for Special Crimes (Jampidsus), on Friday (August 28, 2026). The second pretrial motion concerns the legality of the Attorney General's Office's coercive measures in naming Febrie a suspect in an alleged money laundering (TPPU) case, including his detention.
https://www.law-justice.co/detail.php?ID=209599Febri Diansyah, the lawyer for the former Deputy Attorney General for Special Crimes (Jampidsus) of the Attorney General's Office, Febrie Adriansyah, said that his client was sincere and respected the decision of the sole judge of the South Jakarta District Court (PN) who rejected the Pretrial regarding the search and seizure.
Febrie Adriansyah's legal team expressed regret that the South Jakarta District Court rejected his pretrial motion and ignored the application of the Miranda Rules and the procedural errors in the investigation. (165 characters)
Coverage Details
Bias Distribution
- 100% of the sources lean Right
Factuality
To view factuality data please Upgrade to Premium
