Google Cloud Speech-to-Text API (Chirp) + Gemini 2.5 Flash Non-Thinking. Treat it as a searchable index of what was broadcast, not a quotation record.
00:00:00or that opinion was thrown out
00:00:03right, what, when people
00:00:06are in public office or
00:00:10or they are no longer public officials as I said earlier,
00:00:13public officials are never free, right, even at night
00:00:17when they are not working, they are still the village head, they are still the
00:00:21governor, they are still public officials. So,
00:00:24because of that, when interacting with the community,
00:00:28then he
00:00:30the pattern is that pattern of expressing opinions, criticism, and
00:00:34and so on, Mr. Yes, Mr. Fikar, this
00:00:37is interesting because what concerns the panel
00:00:41that the indictment of judges is that the verdict in this case is not just to resolve
00:00:44conflicts between parties, but also to provide
00:00:47in conclusion between the experts legal certainty for the public, but we will discuss it after we find out
00:00:51the current condition at the East Jakarta District Court. Our colleague
00:00:54Rona Marina will report directly from the
00:00:58East Jakarta District Court.
00:01:00Rona,
00:01:04good, viewers, we will present the latest information
00:01:07regarding the case that will be heard today, after the following
00:01:10break, stay with
00:01:12us.
00:01:19Accurate news is more
00:01:21important than just delivering news quickly.
00:01:24Always check and
00:01:27clarify.
00:01:30Strong claims must
00:01:32be sought,
00:01:34evidence must
00:01:36be validated,
00:01:39prime time news only on Metro TV
00:01:42brought
00:01:44the prosecutor, there are also experts to you this Thursday in Go
00:01:48Healthy, I have diabetes, my blood
00:01:52sugar level was at 600, I
00:01:56thought that because I was a sports teacher, I could
00:02:01avoid health problems, it turns
00:02:04out that all of that was a big
00:02:08mistake, I regularly use laser technology, I
00:02:11feel healthy and fit, watch the full story, Thursday,
00:02:15November 5th,
00:02:18this is about and for those
00:02:22who are full of questions who choose to
00:02:25remain silent, we must remember that power
00:02:28belongs to the people.
00:02:33This is the place for policy makers to answer all
00:02:37questions, as well as a space for the people to understand their
00:02:40value to the country. Indonesia's
00:02:43and the evidence Priority every Monday to Friday at 3:30
00:02:45PM.
00:02:48We accompany you from afternoon to evening with actual and
00:02:52quality news. The hottest information of the day
00:02:55we review in depth along with
00:02:57its developments. Metro
00:03:00today prime time
00:03:03news and top
00:03:06news,
00:03:08update and deepen your insights with the latest
00:03:11information only on our afternoon
00:03:14programs.
00:03:17We
00:03:24act. On the other hand, the person
00:03:56is presented here, honor and
00:03:57awaited by the public, one in X. But the two
00:04:01video rings have already been said
00:04:04by your honor. Okay,
00:04:07regarding
00:04:09still related to the two video uploads,
00:04:13does the witness still remember who uploaded it
00:04:17or on what account?
00:04:20apa?
00:04:32Your Honor,
00:04:34its name, looking so
00:04:35the upload
00:04:38was uploaded to
00:04:40YouTube
00:04:43with the title "Fake Diploma Jo".
00:04:46Based on analysis of font type and operating
00:04:51that he had brought the necessary system, it was uploaded by Apur Egi
00:04:55Sujana channel, this was uploaded
00:04:58by oh Balide Academy, yes,
00:05:01Balige Academy, correct, then
00:05:04on YouTube, then the second one on
00:05:08YouTube again, this was uploaded by
00:05:11Mr. Sujana and Damai
00:05:14Haribis, then the
00:05:17third
00:05:19was uploaded
00:05:23to X
00:05:25by
00:05:28Dr. your Honor.
00:05:31Okay, regarding
00:05:34the three uploads from social
00:05:37media shown by Shariff,
00:05:40did the witness then
00:05:44have a second witness to collect other videos?
00:05:47lain
00:05:51The other videos
00:05:54are prepared
00:05:56by
00:05:58the legal advisory team, Your Honor, but in fact,
00:06:02viewers, we invite you again to dialogue with Mr. Abdul Fikar Hajar
00:06:06as a criminal law expert, Mr. Fikar is still connected with us,
00:06:09sir. Yes, okay. Ready,
00:06:12Mr. Fikar, in the previous segment, we talked about
00:06:16the legal consequences if the indictment is not
00:06:19proven. Of course, in the end, we
00:06:22want to see what should be the concern of the Panel
00:06:25of Judges so that the verdict in this case not only resolves
00:06:29conflicts between parties, but also provides legal
00:06:32certainty for the public.
00:06:36Yes, I think that's what
00:06:39the judges should also think
00:06:43about, right? Although theoretically, judges
00:06:47should not be influenced by anything, right? Because they
00:06:50have to decide a case
00:06:54based on the evidence in court and
00:06:58their own conviction. Well, that's what, meaning they
00:07:01should not accept intervention from, uh, uh,
00:07:04what, intervention from outside parties or
00:07:08from anything, right? Whether from power or
00:07:12from individuals and so on. Well, that intervention
00:07:15is not allowed. That is to guarantee the independence of the judiciary, the independence
00:07:18of judicial power, right? Well, because of that,
00:07:21uh, what, the judge
00:07:25usually only
00:07:28adheres to what happens in court
00:07:32and the consequence is that the parties
00:07:35in the case also have the right to prove
00:07:38each other wrong. If it used to be, right, criminal cases
00:07:42were one-sided, right?
00:07:45Usually, the one who
00:07:49dominated the trial was the state in the form of the public
00:07:52prosecutor with his witnesses
00:07:55brought because the defendant was considered to have committed
00:07:59a crime or a criminal act, uh, what,
00:08:02that's how it was, but uh, what, in its development,
00:08:06then after the birth
00:08:09of the Criminal Procedure Code in
00:08:121981, then the criminal trial
00:08:16became adversarial, right? It became
00:08:20like a civil case, the parties have the same
00:08:24right on one side, the state, right, through
00:08:27the prosecutor, proves the crime of a defendant,
00:08:31a person who has been accused of committing a crime or a criminal
00:08:36accused of committing a crime or a criminal
00:08:40act also has the right to...
00:08:51uh, not commit a criminal act or if they do, the condition is like this, they defend
00:08:54themselves or that's part
00:08:57of the self-defense
00:09:01mechanism and in certain attacks, for example, that's how
00:09:05it is. So what I want to say is that there
00:09:09is equality among the parties to present. That's why it's not
00:09:12now, for example, that a criminal case
00:09:16becomes long because in addition to the prosecutor
00:09:20presenting witnesses and other evidence, the legal
00:09:23counsel and the defendant can also present, for
00:09:27example, mitigating witnesses, or other
00:09:31mitigating evidence, right? If it used to
00:09:34be limited to witnesses, but if
00:09:37it's now, it's also open
00:09:41that the defendant and legal counsel can, for example,
00:09:44present evidence, but that evidence must still be
00:09:47tested, its validity, its
00:09:50issuance, and so on. Well, that's what happens.
00:09:54So now civil cases, if civil cases have always
00:09:58been, two parties have the same opportunity
00:10:00to prove their arguments,
00:10:03and also criminal cases or other cases,
00:10:07Mr. PTTUN and so on, now these have become
00:10:11adversarial, right? They have become a forum
00:10:14where the parties are given the freedom to
00:10:18prove and to refute. Well,
00:10:21uh, what's its name,
00:10:25the reference is that whoever
00:10:27mengajukan
00:10:29submits an argument or a fact,
00:10:33then they must prove it. Well,
00:10:36whoever refutes it also has to prove their refutation.
00:10:40Well, that's what happens. So it's not
00:10:43surprising if a trial, especially a trial that attracts
00:10:47public attention, will be long, right?
00:10:50Long in the sense of the examination of
00:10:54its evidence, the time is so
00:10:57long that it becomes a battle of arguments
00:11:01in the judiciary that will then be concluded by
00:11:04the judge in his verdict, miss.
00:11:07Mr. Fikar, in this case, if there is a difference
00:11:12presented by the prosecutor and the experts from the defendant's side, what
00:11:16will be the parameters used by the judge to determine
00:11:20which expert's opinion can be scientifically
00:11:23and legally
00:11:25accountable?
00:11:27Theoretically, it should not
00:11:30be possible for differences to arise among
00:11:33experts. Between parties, it's permissible, not permissible,
00:11:37but there will certainly be differences, for example, between
00:11:40the prosecutor and the legal counsel. But experts, because
00:11:44they start from the same theory,
00:11:46right? From the same research
00:11:50findings, right? It's just that maybe
00:11:54he has a different opinion because of a different
00:11:56perspective. But theoretically, there shouldn't
00:12:00be any differences among experts,
00:12:03but as I said, because the experts are brought
00:12:06by the state or
00:12:09brought by this side, so there will
00:12:13probably be differences that are not fundamental
00:12:17but more technical differences, right?
00:12:20But fundamental theoretical differences, I don't
00:12:24think will ever happen because,
00:12:27what, they are based on the same
00:12:31source, right? Especially, for example, legal science, legal
00:12:34theories, and so on,
00:12:37are all studied, right? All studied.
00:12:41It's just that there might be different opinions
00:12:44because of different situations. An expert's opinion can
00:12:48differ if there is
00:12:51an assessment of a different situation.
00:12:55So there is a different point of view from,
00:12:58what, if, if in one fact it's very possible, but
00:13:02as I said, if it's based
00:13:05on interests, then differences will definitely arise, but
00:13:09if the difference, what's its
00:13:12name, views it from the same perspective
00:13:15seeking the same truth, then
00:13:19I think there will never be a difference among the experts,
00:13:22miss. Mr. Fikar, but
00:13:25the results of the forensic laboratory examination of
00:13:29documents have a stronger position compared to digital
00:13:32analysis conducted independently. How does criminal procedure law
00:13:36place these two types of
00:13:38evidence, sir? Yes, okay,
00:13:41as I said earlier,
00:13:43uh,
00:13:45what, forensic laboratory examination, what was
00:13:49the other one, sir? Related
00:13:52to hello, this
00:14:00is how the judge should assess the digital analysis presented by
00:14:04the defendant, sir.
00:14:07Yes, okay, now this means,
00:14:11what, uh,
00:14:14we want to prove authenticity, right? As I said
00:14:17earlier, forensic for example, forensic
00:14:20in my opinion, it can prove
00:14:23authenticity. As long as the paper is original,
00:14:26the writing is original, the stamp is original, right?
00:14:30But whether its authenticity was obtained through a long
00:14:34process and issued by an institution
00:14:37that has the authority, that must be supported by other
00:14:41evidence. The same goes for cyber analysis,
00:14:44data analysis, and so on. That's also the same,
00:14:48in my opinion, it only
00:14:50analyzes authenticity in
00:14:53the context of, what's
00:14:59at one aspect that they master, right?
00:15:03These two should be confronted with the same
00:15:06facts, right? So we need to see
00:15:10whether this is authentic or not, right?
00:15:13That's the problem. Well, if the judge
00:15:16faces such a situation,
00:15:20then it goes back to what I said earlier,
00:15:23even though the formulation as stated
00:15:26in the verdict is
00:15:29a collection of facts that can convince
00:15:32the judge, right? His conviction,
00:15:36whether it's right or wrong, is all the
00:15:39judge's authority. Well, that's why when
00:15:43faced with two different research results,
00:15:46the judge must also look at the facts
00:15:49of the trial, right? And place these research
00:15:53results as facts as well, right? In addition to
00:15:56the facts revealed in the trial factually,
00:16:00there are forensic research results, there are data
00:16:04research results, right? So all of
00:16:07them must be seen as evidence, right?
00:16:11Whether this series of evidence can convince him
00:16:15to then conclude
00:16:18stated by the prosecutor is proven or vice versa.
00:16:22Well, that goes back to his conviction
00:16:25by placing both research results
00:16:28as part of the evidence as
00:16:31part of the series of facts
00:16:34of the trial that may or may not
00:16:37create conviction, it is entirely up to
00:16:40the judge's authority, miss. Okay, thank you, Mr. Abdul Fikar
00:16:44Hajar, criminal law expert, for providing your insights this
00:16:48morning. Viewers, Metro TV breaking news
00:16:52will return after the break,
00:16:53stay with us.
00:16:59This Thursday in Go Healthy, I have
00:17:01diabetes, my blood sugar level was
00:17:04at 600. I thought
00:17:07that because I was a sports teacher,
00:17:11I could avoid health problems.
00:17:14It turned out that
00:17:17all of that was a big mistake. I regularly use laser
00:17:20technology. I feel healthy and
00:17:24fit. Watch the full story Thursday, November
00:17:275th, at 11 AM. Milton Sugarfree is always
00:17:31there for my biggest moments. Every step we take must
00:17:35be meaningful. The whole world is watching...
00:17:46This Thursday in Go Healthy, I have diabetes. My blood sugar level
00:17:49was at 600. I thought that because
00:17:53I was a sports teacher, I could avoid
00:17:56health problems. It turned
00:17:59out that all of that was a big mistake.
00:18:03I regularly use laser technology. I
00:18:05feel healthy and fit. Watch the full story
00:18:09Thursday, November 5th, at 3:30
00:18:48Evolving with trust, some choose
00:18:51to only be spectators of change, but
00:18:54there are also those who choose to take action. 26 young
00:18:58Indonesians with ideas
00:19:0126 days, 26 stories,
00:19:04find inspiration in 26.
00:19:07newsperation in Selamat Pagi Indonesia starting November
00:19:111st.
00:19:14Calling all Indonesian documentary filmmakers. This
00:19:18is the time to make your ideas shine. Register now
00:19:21at eagleinstitute.id. Get production grant funds up to
00:19:25120
00:19:26million rupiah.
00:19:33President Joko Widodo becomes a witness in the defamation case.
00:20:18Jokowi's two children, Kaesang Pangarep and Kahiyang
00:20:22Ayu, also accompanied him. Upon arrival
00:20:25at the location, Jokowi confirmed
00:20:29documents. Jokowi also confirmed
00:20:32that the diploma he brought was an
00:20:36original document, sir.
00:22:20Well, we hope that this morning, the original
00:22:23physical analog diploma will be brought
00:22:26by the prosecutor or the public
00:22:29prosecutor. Don't let it be hidden. Imagine that
00:22:33until the 11th trial for Dr. Tifa and the fourth for
00:22:37us, that diploma never appeared in court.
00:22:41That's very strange because usually, evidence is always
00:22:45presented, and when someone says they have seen it,
00:22:48they will be confronted with whether this
00:23:50is what you mean. Well,
00:23:53there are two threats of punishment for 12 years, right? Or no, not
00:23:56two, four, four. Is it cumulative or
00:24:00alternative? Alternative. Alternative, right? According
00:24:03to you, as Mr. Roy's legal counsel, which threat
00:24:07is it leaning towards, sir? All this time,
00:24:10I don't want to talk like that. I don't want to
00:24:13answer. We believe and are confident
00:24:16that Mr. Roy and Dr. Tifa should be acquitted. There is
00:24:20no article that can be applied to them, neither
00:24:24the article on defamation, because Mr. Roy and
00:24:27Dr. Tifa work for the public interest, public interest,
00:24:31you want to know if the diploma is original or not, right? Unless
00:24:34you don't care, but as long as you care, then this is
00:24:38for the public interest, right? And second, if it's called
00:24:42slander, that's not right. Slander is when Mr. Roy
00:24:45and Dr. Tifa know that the diploma is original
00:24:48but he says it's fake. That's slander.
00:24:52But until now, we don't know if the diploma
00:24:55is original or fake. First, it has never been shown.
00:24:58Second, it has never been openly tested. Well, this is
00:25:02the opportunity. If it is shown today and it is original, how
00:25:06will the Rais Studio side react? A document is original or not
00:25:10original, it's not just shown without physical evidence and
00:25:14we believe it. There must be an adequate test. The question
00:25:17is, is Mr. Jokowi brave enough to give us
00:25:21all, especially Mr. Roy, the opportunity to test
00:25:24it independently, including an independent testing
00:25:28institution, whether it is original or not? So
00:25:31bring in independent experts to test
00:25:34it. For example, if there is a claim, for example,
00:25:38from, I'm sorry to say, a claim that this has been
00:25:41forensically examined by the investigator, right? The investigator
00:25:45is different because theoretically, he is indeed biased
00:25:48towards it in the sense that he is the one who
00:25:52makes the indictment articles. How can he
00:25:56indict and then not be confident in his evidence?
00:25:59Therefore, if it's the investigator's perspective, we cannot
00:26:03trust it. If it's the public prosecutor's perspective,
00:26:06because in this case, we are opposed, we are on opposite
00:26:10sides. Therefore, there must be an independent third party to test
00:26:13the diploma.
00:26:16It will show what
00:26:19is doubted because the item has not been presented
00:26:23all this time. What will happen, will your clients
00:26:26be ready to undergo
00:26:29the punishment process? Why do you keep directing it that
00:26:34way? I'm
00:26:35confused.
00:26:38No, no, no, first,
00:26:41you said, right,
00:26:45are you ready to be punished? I have said
00:26:48that our clients are innocent. Our clients have no
00:26:52article that can be applied to them because
00:26:55they work, they research for the public interest. Second,
00:26:59they did not commit slander because whether the diploma is
00:27:08original or not, they cannot be charged with articles of the ITE Law because there is no physical
00:27:10document testing of electronic
00:27:14documents and electronic information owned by Mr. Jokowi.
00:27:17Electronic documents and electronic information
00:27:20belong to Dian Sandi. So there are many things that we can defend,
00:27:24that's why I'm surprised by your two questions. Okay,
00:27:28please Mr. Refli, one more question, sir, Mr. Jokowi
00:27:31will also say and also tell
00:27:34about his experience while studying at UGM and also bringing
00:27:38that diploma, sir. Well, if there is evidence of that,
00:27:42what about the Raysur side? This proof in court
00:27:45is one moment,
00:27:49one screen only from the entire trial
00:27:52process. Of course, we will see the quality of
00:27:55the evidence, because if you tell a story,
00:27:58you can tell A, B, C, and so on, but later we will
00:28:02cross-check with other witnesses and other evidence.
00:28:06From there, we will then confirm
00:28:09whether Mr. Joko's story is true or not.
00:28:12Of course, our suspicion is that he has
00:28:16prepared a story about studying at UGM and so on
00:28:19and so on, even though we caught an anomaly, for example, regarding
00:28:23the time sequence between him finishing college,
00:28:26then going to Aceh, then coming back and giving birth
00:28:29to Gibran and so on. That itself doesn't match
00:28:33the time, even though it comes from
00:28:36Jokowi's own YouTube channel.
00:28:39Criminal law expert Hibnu Nogroho believes that Jokowi's
00:28:43presence in court is very important to prove the authenticity
00:28:46of Jokowi's diploma. Jokowi
00:28:49as a witness this time, how important is
00:28:52his testimony to then be able to find evidence
00:28:55in this trial? Yes, in the concept
00:28:59of law, the presence as a victim, as
00:29:02a complainant, is very
00:29:06very important, because in a judicial
00:29:09process, there are four indicators: first, a defense
00:29:13is already underway, then a public hearing,
00:29:16listening, then, uh, proof,
00:29:19and finally, independence, the independence
00:29:23of a judicial process. As a public hearing
00:29:26for the victim, that's where the victim
00:29:30who feels that he or she made
00:29:34the report, made the complaint,
00:29:37must be present to provide
00:29:40an explanation as to the feelings and circumstances
00:29:43of the victim, because in a legal context, there are four pillars,
00:29:47sir: first, the act,
00:29:50then the perpetrator, then the criminal
00:29:54sanction, and then
00:30:00awaited by the court to, at least,
00:30:03clarify, at least, confront with the
00:30:06testimonies of the defendants, confront with the witnesses.
00:30:10other, thus as the concept of justice now
00:30:13is a concept of justice that seeks material truth,
00:30:17the real truth about what object
00:30:21is going to be examined, that's right Mas, okay Prof. Hipnu,
00:30:24is Joko Widodo's current position as a reporter or as you
00:30:28said as a victim, does this mean when giving testimony.
00:30:32that its weight becomes heavier, so that it can then
00:30:36fight or confront what
00:30:39has been conveyed by the defendant so
00:30:42far? Yes, if we look at a
00:30:46concept of proof in a new paradigm of evidence,
00:30:49there is no weight, but it has
00:30:53the same qualification of evidence, it has the same
00:30:57evidence as other witnesses, only.