TAUD Files Pretrial Motion Over Acid Attack

An acid attack case in Indonesia just split into two fights at once. One is the military trial now underway against four soldiers accused of attacking rights activist Andrie Yunus. The other is a new court challenge from the Advocacy Team for Democracy, or TAUD, which says the civilian police investigation was allowed to stall. That second fight is the news here — because it goes to a bigger question than who threw the acid. It asks who gets to investigate violence against a civilian when the suspects are military personnel. (en.tempo.co) ### Who is Andrie Yunus? Andrie Yunus is a deputy coordinator at KontraS, the Indonesian rights group focused on disappearances and state violence. He has been one of the public critics of the military’s expanding role in civilian life. On March 12, 2026, two men on a motorcycle threw acid at him in Jakarta, leaving serious burns and major damage to his right eye. (alj([en.tempo.co)-attack-on-activist)) ### What did TAUD file? TAUD registered a pretrial motion at the South Jakarta District Court on April 29. The target is not the military defendants themselves. It is the handling of the case by Jakarta Metro Police, which TAUD says stopped moving even though there were already two police reports in the system — one filed right after the attack and another later submitted through the National Police’s criminal investigation unit before being sent to Metro Jaya. (en.tempo.co) ### Why say the investigation “stalled”? The core complaint is simple. Metro Jaya says its authority ended after the case was handed to Puspom TNI, the military police, and that the evidence was transferred digitally on April 1. TAUD’s view is that this is exactly the problem — a violent attack on a civilian should not just disappear from the civilian justice track beca(en.tempo.co)er the police stopped too early or unlawfully. (en.tempo.co) ### What is happening in the military court? The military side has moved faster. Jakarta Military Court II-08 opened proceedings on April 29 against four TNI personnel assigned to the Strategic Intelligence Agency, or BAIS. Prosecutors say the attack was premeditated, that the defendants tracked Yunus’s movements, and that they used a mixture including battery acid and rust remover. Reports from the opening hearing say prosecutors are seeking up to 12 years in prison. (en.tempo.co) ### So why isn’t that enough? Because the argument is no longer just about the direct attackers. Rights groups have been saying from the start that the case should be investigated up the chain of command and not treated as four rogue individuals acting in a vacuum. KontraS and other advocates also object to trying the matter only in a military forum, where Indonesia has a long and politically loaded history of impunity in abuse cases involving security forces. (voi.id) ### Why does the civilian-versus-military venue matter so much? It matters because venue shapes both transparency and reach. A military court can prosecute soldiers, but critics worry it is less likely to test institutional responsibility in a case where the victim is a civilian activist who had criticized the armed forces. TAUD’s filing is really pushing on that pressure point — not just punishment for the men charged, but a public rul(voi.id)ll had duties they could not simply hand away. (en.tempo.co) ### What should readers watch next? Two tracks. First, whether the pretrial motion is accepted and whether judges order any renewed civilian investigative steps. Second, whether the military trial stays tightly focused on the four defendants or starts surfacing evidence about motive, planning, and superiors. That is the real bottom line here: Indonesia has suspects in court, but the fight over full accountability has only gotten sharper. (en.tempo.co)