PALEMBANG , GESAHKITA COM—H Armansyah SE MM Lawyer , the former director of BPR (Rural Bank), Raju Diagunsyah SH, conveyed his right to answer regarding the news which he said was misleading to the public.
Previously reported in several online media, the Public Prosecutor Team (JPU) of the Palembang Kejari, Indah Kumala Dewi, Sigit Subiantoro, Indra Susanto and Dyah Rachmawati, sued the former Managing Director of the Rural Bank (BPR) Palembang City for the 2013 – 2018 period Armansyah (56 years old) who is a defendant in a banking crime case with a sentence of 10 years in prison.
Raju said the information in front of the media can be misleading and lead to negative issues against his clients.
Raju then relays his response on a point quote:
“And the actions of the defendant as the Managing Director of BPR resulted in losses with a total ceiling of Rp. 3.8 billion, which were carried out by ignoring the precautionary principle”
Raju said, as has been revealed in the trial facts at court, so far BPR has not lost anything.
“What’s the basis? BPR loses?,” he said.
“BPR has no loss and also until now BPR is not subject to special supervision sanctions by the OJK,” added Raju again.
In this credit, said Raju, there is collateral whose value is above the credit value carried out by an independent appraisal or Public Appraisal Service Office (KJPP).
The collateral is currently controlled by the Bank (BPR Palembang ) and has been encumbered with Mortgage Rights (HT).
Raju then also explained, the Credit Ceiling Value of Rp. 3,800,000,000 and the Collateral Value is Rp. 4,300,000,000 while the rest of the Collateral Value Credit Ceiling is Rp. 500,000,000.
Then the credit has been paid in installments for 7 months so that the remaining Rp. 3, 300,000,000,- means the difference is over 1000,000,000.
“So, said Raju, “The existence of credit collateral whose value is above the credit ceiling is an effort to implement the Prudential Principle.”
“Once again I emphasize, the bad credit has a guarantee worth 4.3 billion (independent appraisal) and is bound by a notary (trial facts) currently controlled by BPR Palembang and will be auctioned and the BPR does not lose,” he asserted.
Furthermore, Raju Diagunsyah SH responded to the statements reported by the media on the points:
As for the aggravating considerations in the prosecution’s claim that the defendant’s actions damaged the credibility and good image of the bank, the defendant’s actions caused PT BPR’s bad loans.
In the statement said Raju, “In what case did the defendant damage the credibility of the BPR?”
It must be known that BPR is only 3 years old, so far there has been no Rush (Withdrawal of large funds by all customers) BPR has actually made a profit on my Client’s work.
BPR initially had a capital of only 6 billion, so that within 1 year of operation, BPR managed to reap assets of Rp. 66 Billion Over.
“Now he is going to be punished, where is the humanity? And what legal civilization should we uphold?”
At the suggestion and initiation of Pak Arman, the Palembang City Government currently owns this BPR(Bank). One year he was not paid with and because of a strong desire to establish BPR Palembang.
Regarding bad credit, all banks have bad credit and it’s just a matter of whether the credit is secure or not and the guarantee is even more secure.
Raju said that his party is currently compiling the material for the plenary session which will be read out on June 3.
In addition, Raju said, the element of the claim indicated ‘vengeance’ because his party had already had 2 pre-trial hearings and lost.
“Thus, let the public know also what Raju said, what the heck is this,” he said in short.
“So the 10-year demand and the fine is too much and is very, very cruel, very far from the elements of a judiciary that is humane and fair and it is also clear that this is “Abuse Of Power” and this statement is clearly an issue that misleads the public, “concluded Raju. Diagunsyah SH. (irfan/goik/UPDATED English Version)
