DENPASAR, BALINEWS — Lawyers representing I Made Daging, the former head of the Bali Regional Office of the National Land Agency (BPN), have challenged the presiding judge to demonstrate independence and courage in ruling on their client’s pretrial motion concerning his designation as a suspect and his detention.
The legal team maintains that its arguments are well-founded and urges the court to examine the substance and legality of the investigators’ actions.
The statement was made by defense lawyer Gede Pasek Suardika following a pretrial hearing at the Cakra Courtroom of the Denpasar District Court on Monday, October 12, 2026. The hearing was scheduled for the parties to submit their final conclusions in case No. 16/Pid.Pra/2026/PN Denpasar, in which the Bali Police’s Directorate of Special Criminal Investigation (Ditreskrimsus) is the respondent.
“Based on our conclusions, everything is clear. The legal requirements have not been met. Now there is only one issue left: courage. It takes courage to make the call,” Pasek said after the hearing.
According to Pasek, the judge must now determine whether the investigators’ actions in the case involving his client comply with applicable legal requirements. He urged the court to consider the substance of the motion and the evidence presented by the defense rather than focusing solely on procedural formalities.
Pasek also referred to an earlier pretrial proceeding in which, according to him, the court had ruled in favor of Made Daging’s side. However, he argued that the outcome had not resolved the issues his team had raised concerning the handling of the case.
“The motion was granted, and we won, but then the case could not proceed. The police used the pretrial proceedings as a reason to discontinue the previous case. Doesn't that mean our arguments were correct?” he said.
Pasek expressed hope that the same situation would not recur in the current proceedings. He called on the judge to deliver a ruling based on sound legal reasoning and judicial independence.
Defense Calls for Progressive Legal Approach
Another member of the legal team, I Made Ariel Suardana, said their final submission emphasized the importance of a progressive approach to the law in pretrial proceedings.
According to Ariel, pretrial review serves as a legal mechanism to protect human rights and examine law enforcement actions that may constitute an abuse of authority.
“The spirit of the Criminal Procedure Code is rooted in the philosophy of human rights. When there is potential arbitrariness by investigators, the judge must have the courage to take corrective action and deliver a progressive ruling,” Ariel said.
The defense team also challenged what it described as repeated investigations that it believes raise concerns about alleged criminalization. In addition, the lawyers questioned the validity of the detention order and argued that the stated purpose of the detention did not comply with applicable legal provisions.
Ariel stressed that judges must remain independent and resist any form of pressure in carrying out their judicial duties. He said pretrial proceedings should provide a mechanism for the courts to review state actions when citizens' rights are alleged to have been violated.
“The law exists as a means of correcting violations committed by the state,” he said.
The allegations and legal arguments presented by the defense remain subject to judicial consideration.
Bali Police Rejects the Applicant’s Arguments
Meanwhile, I Nyoman Gatra, the lawyer representing the Bali Police as the respondent, said his side rejected the arguments presented in the pretrial motion.
He urged all parties to await the judge’s ruling, which is scheduled to be delivered on Tuesday, October 13, 2026.
“In essence, we reject all the arguments presented by the applicant. Everything is already covered in our written response,” Gatra said after the hearing.
Gatra declined to comment further on the possible outcome, saying he did not want to anticipate the judge’s decision. He added that his side would determine its next steps after the court announced its ruling.
Nevertheless, he expressed confidence ahead of the decision.
“As officers, we must always remain optimistic. One hundred percent,” he said.
With the submission of the parties’ final conclusions completed, the case is now awaiting the judge’s decision. The court will determine the outcome of Made Daging’s pretrial motion based on the proceedings and the applicable legal provisions.
