Windu Aji Scandal: judgment by corruption but washed the money that was money

Jakarta -The owner of PT Lawu Agung Mining (lamb) Windu Aji Sutanto has been stated that he enjoys the money of corruption associated with the nickel ore mining case in the Mandiodo block, Northern Konwes, Southeast -Sulawesi. However, Windu was not sentenced in a case of money laundering (TPPU) related to the corruption case it entangled. It was said in the ruling of the ruling held at the Central Jakarta Corruption Court on Wednesday (9/24/2025). Windu was not punished with regard to the TPPU of RP 1.7 billion associated with the nickel corruption. Nevertheless, there is a judge who has declared a diverse opinion on the decision. Look at the summary at AFP. Browse to continue with the content will be prosecuted for 6 years imprisonment before the ruling of the verdict was held, Windu Aji was claimed 6 years imprisonment and a fine of RP 500 million in 6 months in prosecutor. The prosecutor believes that Windu is guilty of doing TPPU associated with the nickel -mining corruption case in the Mandiodo block. The trial of reading Windu Aji Sutanto’s verdict in the case of money laundering (TPPU) related to ore -mini -mini -urban ripple in the Bathodo block (Noble/detikcom) said that the defendant Windu AJI Sutanto was legally proven to have a conviction of the Central Jakarta Court. In the Central Jakarta. (8/13). the same deed, ”the judge added. However, proven corruption claimed that the windy block was through the purchase of three luxury rates, money corruption in the Mandi block, by buying the linked time, the money correcting in the Mandi block by buying three luxury. Alphard, and Mercedes-Benz, who were above the name of PT Lam. 1,708,773,000, “the judge said. In this session, the judge also did not capture Glenn Ario Sudarto as the field implement of PT Lam. A diverse opinion on the verdict said. — Legislation. Paragraph 1 of the 1st of the penalty code, “said Judge Hiashinta Fransiska Manalu at two judges that the Windu AJI case in the TPPU case considers Nebis in Idem, or that a person cannot be prosecuted twice for the same case and has permanent legal force, the judge did not judge Vishnu in the TPPU case. based, the defendant of different criminal acts has been charged, “the judge said. Judge Hiashinta said the prosecutor gained freedom through the Criminal Procedure Act to draw up the charges in various forms as in the attorney -general circular, both in the form of a single, alternative, cumulative and combination. Eliminate criminal liability, whether as a justification and or forgiving reasons, and the defendant could be responsible, the defendant must be convicted and sentenced to criminals, “Judge Hiashinta said. committed, an account opened in the name of Supriyono and Opah Erlangga Pratama. The basis of the money laundering in the a quo case and the purchase of three cars, namely one Toyota Land Cruiser unit, one Mercy unit, one Toyota Alphard unit that uses the account well and the place of the defendant was considered in Pusat on Wednesday (9/24). The origin in question is the decision of the Supreme Court Number 7918 K/Pid.Sus2024, decision of PT DKI Number 32/Pid.sus-pid/2024/pt. DKI, and decide number 116/pid.sus-p.cup/2023/pn jkt. PST. The judge assessed that the three cars that Windu purchased with the help of the nickel mining money also seized the country. “And during the hearing, the prosecutor also explained that the three cars were auctioned for the state,” the judge said. The judge assessed that the money laundering case charged with Windu was a case with the same act in the nickel corruption case. The judge said the tiger money laundering case was repetition or nebis in Idem. “Considering that because in the A quo case, both the description of the actions and returns of the crime committed by the defendant were decided in the corruption case as a decision of the Supreme Court number 7918 k/Pid.Sus2024 Juncto decision of PT DKI number 32/Pid.sus-pid.sus-pid.sus-pid.suspk/2024/pt DKI Juncto Number 116/Pid. to be prosecuted for the same act. (FCA/FCA)