Meanwhile, the reason for rejecting mediation was because Kaligis wanted the lawsuit at the South Jakarta District Court to go straight

Jakarta, internasionalpos.com.

Lawyer OC Kaligis rejected mediation in the case of accusations against AKBP Bintoro, former Head of Criminal Investigation Unit of the South Jakarta Metro Police, Polda Metro Jaya with the party suing his client at the South Jakarta District Court.

“So that the public knows clearly, is it true that Bintoro received a bribe of Rp 20 billion, then it is better to hold a trial,” said OC Kaligis in Jakarta, Wednesday.

Kaligis said that the accusations against his client Bintoro were made up without sufficient basis so that it was easy to convey to the media and was considered true.

Meanwhile, the reason for rejecting mediation was because Kaligis wanted the lawsuit at the South Jakarta District Court to go straight to the substance of the main case, so that it was clear.

In fact, he said, the acceptance of the Rp 20 billion bribe was deliberately “fried” by another party so that it was cornered and the public considered the problem as if the problem was true.

“If the law of causality is used, if Bintoro received that much money, the case would have been issued a Termination of Investigation (SP3) Order,” said Kaligis.

However, the reality is that the rape case with suspects Arif Nugroho alias Sebastian and Muhammad Bayu Hartono continued to the prosecutor’s office and the case was declared complete (P21).

This is related to Bintoro being sued at the South Jakarta District Court with case registration number 30/Pdt.G/2025/PN.Jkt.Sel by the suspects because it was considered an unlawful act.

This case emerged from the alleged murder and violence against two minors investigated by Bintoro as Head of Criminal Investigation by ensnaring two suspects that occurred at a hotel in South Jakarta, the victim eventually died.

However, recently there has been a narrative that has gone viral on social media that Bintoro committed extortion.

Even the trial of the case, Wednesday (5/2/2025) with a mediation agenda but because the plaintiff’s attorney was not ready, it was finally postponed and continued next week.

** (adi)