NOTIFICATION OF CLASS ACTION

NOTIFICATION OF

CLASS REPRESENTATION ACCUSATION (CLASS ACTION)

Legal Aid Association And Indonesia Human Right (PBHI)

Based on: PERMA Number. 1 year 2002, Article 1e, Article 7, Article 8;

The Decree of Judge Assembly Number. 636/pdt. g/2008/PN. JKT Sel.

dated 3 July 2008

In connection with (jo) Judge Assembly arrangement No: 636/pdt. g/2008/PN JKT Sel, dated 10 July 2008.

In relation with the stipulated of this accusation by class representation accusation mechanism in State Court of Jakarta Selatan with case register No. 636/pdt. g/2008/PN. JKT. Sel dated 8 May 2008 that attributed towards: Agus Martowardojo as Managing Director of PT. Bank Mandiri (Company) Unlimited, Bambang Setiawan as Director Compliance & Human Capital of PT. Bank Mandiri (Company) Unlimited., Kresno Sediarsi as Chairman of Civil Service Deliberation Team A and Head Human Capital Group of PT. Bank Mandiri (Company) Unlimited., Bambang Ari Prasodjo as Chairman of Central Mandiri Club Board (Hereinafter referred to as Defendants. So the lawyer of Plaintiffs that joined into Legal Aid Association and Indonesia Human Right (PBHI) based on Judge Assembly Arrangement in Court Session on 3 July 2008 about the accepted class action procedural in connection with – jo Judge Assembly Arrangement dated 10 July 2008 about notification, ordering to Plaintiff to tell to the entire Bank Mandiri employees who gets sanction caused to do demonstration, as follows:

That the accusation in regard to acts of opposing law in the form of sanction imposition by superior / Head of Area

Each employee on the mandate or command from Agus Martowardojo as Managing Director of PT. Bank Mandiri (Company) Unlimited,

Bambang Setiawan as Director Compliance Human Capital of PT. Bank Mandiri (Company) Unlimited, Kresno Sediarsi as Chairman of Civil Service Deliberation Team A and Head Human Capital Group of PT. Bank Mandiri (Company) Unlimited., Bambang Ari Prasodjo as Chairman of Central Mandiri Board Association that consequence of the implementation of demonstration on 4 Augusts 2007 by SPBM: Serikat Pegawai Bank Mandiri (Bank Mandiri United Employees members)

That due to the suit submitted based on mechanism or class representation accusation program, then in this suit who act as class representative at numbers of 6 persons consisting of:

1. Miss Mirisnu Viddiana (representative from officials that imposed Lay off sanction) as representative of Class I,

2. Eko Heri Susanto (representative from official that imposed suspension /free from work sanctions) as representative of Class II,

3. Sigit Sudrajat (representative from official that imposed a writen reprimand sanction) as representative of Class III,

4. Arif Fadilla (representative from official that imposed a written warning sanction) as representative of Class IV,

5. Yetty Prihatiningsih (representative from official that imposed character building from superior) as representative of Class V,

6. Wilda Hamzah (representative from official imposed observation sanction) as representative of Class VI;

Apart from act for self, also act to represent the interest of the entire of Bank Mandiri employees who affected consequence sanction due to demonstration on 4 Augusts 2007;

That when brother and sister as class member as defined above, you have a right to binding yourself as Plaintiff in this accusation and decision that will be given later by Judge Assembly of State Court Jakarta Selatan will be effect as well as binding you;

That when brother and sister as class member as defined above, you do not want to be bound with suit and decision was meant then you can make statement of walk out in writing such as those which as described in form below.

The statement sent to:

a. Registrar/ State Court Secretary of Jakarta Selatan c. q. State Court Civil Young Registrar Jakarta Selatan have an address in Jalan Ampera Raya No. 133, Ragunan, Jakarta Selatan;

b. Plaintiffs c. q. Lawyer of Legal Aid Association law and Indonesia Human Right (PBHI) with address in Jalan Matraman Raya Block A2/18, Jl. Matraman Raya No. 148, Jakarta Timur 13150 Phone. (021)-85918064,8519675-6.

That when you within 15 days since the issuance of the notification not give statement walk out as class member, then you are bind and submit to the decision of Judge Assembly in the case.

The above all is true that this notification is submitted, for your kind attention we say thank.

Jakarta, 18 July 2008

Secretary / Registrar

Signatory

Mrs. Hj. Lilies Djuaningsih, SH, MH.

INDICATED MONEY POLITICS IN BANK MANDIRI CASE

The aftermath of demo action of Bank Mandiri United Employees (SPBM) on last 4 Augusts 2007, bear fruit of Lay of (PHK) toward General Leader of SPBM, Miss Mirisnu Viddiana. The verdict was decided by PHI: Pengadilan Hubungan Industri (Industrial Relation Court Jakarta). But that decision is evaluated void (defected law) because judge ignores law facts, for that reason Viddi accompanied by OPSI: Organisasi Pekerja Seluruh Indonesia (All Indonesian Labor Organization) accuse verdict submitting appeal to KY: Komisi Judicial (Judicial Committee).

Crisis on BANK MANDIRI organization between SPBM led Miss Mirisnu Viddiana and BANK MANDIRI management is still moving up to today. Almost one year the polemic run, since Viddi, nickname of Miss Mirisnu Viddiana. on last 4 August 2006, lead a number of 1600 BANK MANDIRI employees from all-Indonesia carry out protest demands on employee welfare improvement, and accuse egotism and arrogance of management with demand succession of BANK MANDIRI management. Almost one year from now Viddi endure suspension period through several stages. Finally Judge Assembly of PHI that presided at Heru Pramono, have as member Dudi Hidayat and Juanda Pangaribuan, on last 22 July 2008 to lay off (PHK/ to break working relation) against Miss Mirisnu Viddiana. In related decision Viddi, as Chairman of SPBM evaluated to responsible on SPBM demonstration action on Saturday, 4 August 2007. Management side equivocated that demonstration action has underestimate image and reputation of company. Sanction on that deed is pursuant to PKB: Perjanjian Kerja Bersama (Joint Working Agreement) and Discipline Employee Regulation is Lay off.

As a result, Judge Assembly approves of BANK MANDIRI management proposition. But verdict signaled was found conspiracy between BANK MANDIRI management and PHI Judge. For that reason, in last week SPBM, OPSI and PBHI spread out press conference in Jakarta Media Center (JMC); Press Council Building, Kebon Sirih Jakarta. In that meeting they have evaluated Judge Assembly has legalized Lay off machination was made by BANK MANDIRI Management, and ignore the existing law facts.

Following Totok Yulianto, SH from PBHI, when seen to PHI Verdict No. Perkara: 42/PHI. G/2008/PN. JKT. PST in Case of Industrial Relation Dispute between PT BANK MANDIRI Persero (Unlimited) and Miss Mirisnu Viddiana, as the defendant that decided on 22 July 2008, Judge Assembly has very ignored law facts submitted by the defendant, to set aside expert witness explanation emphatically stated that it is not justified to Lay off by PT BANK MANDIRI side.

On the occasion Yulianto explained any name error of the accused; Miss Mirisnu Viddiana in plaintiff suit that is BANK MANDIRI in law due process called as error in persona. “This is principle error and basic, but by Judge Assembly is override and only stated as error typing merely, ”said Yulianto. The other errors for him there is in power of attorney mentioned in law suit letter. Grossly power of attorney mentioned not for aquo case. Because its date and number between plaintiff’s power of attorney to law suit issued by plaintiff very differ. “but again Judge Assembly override the fact by wrong typing reason so that exception of defendant is rejected. ” he remarked.

On that occasion Saepul Tavip from OPSI suspects and strongly alleged that any money politics between Judge Assembly with management of BANK MANDIRI. “for that reason by the straighten of judicial institution power, they push to Judicial Committee to investigate, and take action against affirmatively for Judges that bring to justice case that acted as not objective, professional and proportional, as well as defect law itself in legalizing and carrying out smuggling law systemically. ”described Tavip.

For that reason, SPBM and PBHI stated that attitude to call for all united workers/labor movement elements and NGO in-house to continue control judge behavior in Industrial Relation Court in all-Indonesia, by preventing dirty practice of money politics that still often happened in the middle of law enforcement then decrease with founding of judicature mafia scandals.

They also push to Polda Metro Jaya immediately to follow-up solemn complaint report from Miss Mirisnu Viddiana about indicated the presence of criminal acts strongly, that is infringement towards UU No. 21 year 2000 about trade union / united workers, Article 28 in connection with – jo Article 43 that carried out by BANK MANDIRI officials.

In addition, insist to Minister of Manpower & Transmigration of Republic of Indonesia and DPR Committee IX of RI give more attention and the real protection towards united workers, are in operating function and organization activity from all kind of pressure and intimidation that done by entrepreneur circle. “Because the matter grossly mentioned as infringement form towards ILO Convention No. 87 about freedom of association that has been ratified by Indonesia Government, ” said Tavif.

On the verdict of Judge Assembly of Industrial Relation Court Jakarta evaluated very strange and far from sense of justice. Miss Mirisnu Viddiana stated that throw out and file appellate legal effort to Judicial Committee. For him BANK MANDIRI Management through PHI to lay off itself by compensation offer more than 1 billion, but Viddi reject the money, “For me not matter of money, such a money could be used up in a given time, but I am eager to look for justice, I permanently fight for till today, ” said Viddi firmly.

Meanwhile, Chairman of Judge Assembly Heru Pramono, in apart venue to be uninterested on Viddi step. “Please if they report us to KY. Tut following us, in the case of they not satisfied with our decision, they should go through legal effort by appellate that has been regulated in law. ” he remarked.

Heru confirmed, Judge Assembly has been appropriate apply law in that case. He rebutted himself tend to be permissive on name typing error of Viddi in law suit. “Lawyer of defendant has submit the objection in the exception. We also considering it, ” he said.

Meanwhile Heru deplore lawyer attitude of Viddi that report to the KY case. “If every side that lose denounce to KY, how many KY will handle the complaint? Because unlikely, PHI will decide the winner and the loser. Otherwise there peace indeed yes, ” he remarked. (M. Taufik Rakhmanto)