Rezky Aditya's party assesses that there are irregularities in the MA's decision regarding Wenny's child
Rezky Aditya finally opened his voice after his cassation regarding the determination of Wenny Ariani's child status was rejected by the Supreme Court. Through his attorney, Ana Sofa Yuking, his party assessed that there were irregularities in the supreme court judge's decision.
Ana Sofa Yuking opened an explanation of the reasons why Rezky Aditya filed an appeal against the determination of the status of Wenny Ariani's child.
"The consideration of our client filing an appeal at that time was the first, how could a high court judge decide that the plaintiff's child is our client's biological child even though there is no evidence to show a legal relationship between the two," Ana opened. Yuking Sofa viewed from Citra Kirana and Rezky Aditya's YouTube channel, Wednesday (21/6/2023).
"In fact, the existence of a biological relationship that can be done with a DNA test has never been done," he continued.
Rezky Aditya's attorney said that the judge had set aside facts and evidence in making his decision. They considered that there was an error in the application of the law by the judges of the high court.
"In our view at that time, the High Court Judge had misapplied the law because he had set aside evidence by deciding a case without basing facts and evidence. In our opinion, the high court's decision really does not fulfill the sense of justice and legal certainty," he continued.
Previously, in a trial held at the Tangerang District Court, Ana Sofa Yuking had proven that her client did not have a legally bound relationship with Wenny Ariani or her child. Among them is the absence of supporting documents showing the existence of a legalized relationship between them.
"Regarding the plaintiff's child, who so far has been proven and proven in court to have no legal relationship with our client Rezky Aditya. In fact, there is no marital relationship between our client and the plaintiff. In fact, then there were also no documents stating that there was a biological relationship between our client and the plaintiff," explained Ana Sofa Yuking.
"So in our view, at that time, it was inappropriate and not legally based on our client being said to have committed an unlawful act," he added.
There was one consideration by the Supreme Court Justices that made Rezky Aditya feel even more awkward. This consideration was said to have never existed and was not proven in the high court.
"From the 51-page cassation memory that our client conveyed the facts in the cassation decision, which only totaled 8 pages, the Supreme Court Judge rejected our client's cassation with only one consideration, namely it was proven that the defendant and the plaintiff lived in the same house," said Ana Sofa Yuking.
"Well, we have to straighten this out. That this fact was never in the consideration of the high court's decision. There is not even a single piece of evidence in the court of first instance showing that our client lives in the same house as the plaintiff," he said firmly.
Ana Sofa Yuking left it up to the public to evaluate the outcome of the Supreme Court's decision which determined Rezky Aditya to be the biological father of Wenny Ariani's child.
"Please, with this cassation decision, the community will judge for themselves this decision as a fact that clearly shows an irregularity in the legal process and really, in our opinion, harms justice for our client. We feel that such a decision is very dangerous if it will later be used as reference material in law enforcement in Indonesia," said attorney Rezky Aditya.
Pihak Rezky Aditya Nilai Ada Kejanggalan Dalam Putusan MA soal Anak Wenny
Pihak Rezky Aditya akhirnya buka suara setelah kasasinya soal penetapan status anak Wenny Ariani ditolak oleh Mahkama Agung. Melalui kuasa hukumnya, Ana Sofa Yuking, pihaknya menilai ada kejanggalan dalam putusan hakim agung.
Ana Sofa Yuking membuka penjelasan alasan Rezky Aditya mengajukan kasasi atas penetapan status anak Wenny Ariani.
"Pertimbangan klien kami mengajukan kasasi pada waktu itu adalah yang pertama, bagaimana mungkin hakim pengadilan tinggi memutuskan bahwa anak penggugat adalah merupakan anak biologis klien kami padahal tidak ada satupun bukti yang menunjukkan adanya hubungan hukum di antara keduanya," buka Ana Sofa Yuking dilihat dari channel YouTube Citra Kirana dan Rezky Aditya, Rabu (21/6/2023).
"Bahkan, adanya hubungan biologis yang bisa dilakukan dengan tes DNA saja belum pernah dilakukan," lanjutnya.
Kuasa hukum Rezky Aditya itu menyebut hakim telah mengesampingkan fakta serta bukti dalam membuat putusan. Mereka menilai ada kesalahan dalam penerapan hukum yang dilakukan oleh hakim pengadilan tinggi.
"Menurut pandangan kami waktu itu, Hakim Pengadilan Tinggi telah salah menerapkan hukum karena telah mengesampingkan pembuktian dengan memutus suatu perkara tanpa mendasarkan fakta dan bukti. Menurut kami putusan pengadilan tinggi sangat tidak memenuhi rasa keadilan dan kepastian hukum," sambungnya.
Sebelumnya, dalam persidangan yang digelar di Pengadilan Negeri Tangerang, Ana Sofa Yuking telah membuktikan kliennya tidak memiliki hubungan yang terikat dalam status hukum dengan Wenny Ariani maupun anaknya. Diantaranya adalah tidak adanya dokumen pendukung yang menunjukkan adanya hubungan yang disahkan secara hukum diantara mereka.
"Terkait anak penggugat yang selama ini secara nyata dan terbukti di persidangan tidak memiliki hubungan hukum dengan klien kami Rezky Aditya. Bahkan, antara klien kami dengan penggugat sama sekali tidak terdapat hubungan perkawinan. Bahkan, kemudian tidak juga ada dokumen yang menyatakan adanya hubungan biologis antara klien kami dan penggugat," terang Ana Sofa Yuking.
"Maka menurut pandangan kami, pada waktu itu, tidak patut dan tidak mendasar secara hukum klien kami dibilang melakukan perbuatan melawan hukum," imbuhnya.
Ada satu pertimbangan Hakim Agung yang membuat pihak Rezky Aditya makin merasa janggal. Pertimbangan itu disebut tidak pernah ada dan tak terbukti di pengadilan tinggi.
"Dari memori kasasi setebal 51 halam yang klien kami sampaikan faktanya dalam putusan kasasi yang hanya berjumlah 8 halaman tersebut, Hakim Agung menolak kasasi klien kami hanya dengan satu pertimbangan, yaitu terbukti tergugat dan penggugat hidup serumah," ucap Ana Sofa Yuking.
"Nah, ini harus kami luruskan. Bahwa fakta ini tidak pernah ada dalam pertimbangan putusan pengadilan tinggi. Bahkan tidak ada satupun bukti dalam pengadilan tingkat pertama yang menunjukkan bahwa klien kami hidup serumah dengan penggugat," tegasnya.
Ana Sofa Yuking menyerahkan kepada masyarakat untuk menilai hasil dari putusan Mahkamah Agung yang menetapkan Rezky Aditya ayah biologis dari anak Wenny Ariani.
"Silakan atas putusan kasasi ini masyarakat menilai sendiri putusan ini sebagai fakta yang terang benderang menunjukkan suatu kejanggalan proses hukum dan sungguh menurut kami menciderai keadilan bagi klien kami. Kami merasa putusan yang demikian sangat berbahaya jika nantinya dijadikan bahan rujukan dalam penegakan hukum di Indonesia," tukas kuasa hukum Rezky Aditya.