Wanting To Control Other Company Shares 'Murah', Mitrida Sinergy Is Suspected Of Taking The PKPU Line

The panel of judges handling the Debt Payment Obligation (PKPU) case for the transfer of shares of PT Pada Idi (PTPI) to PT Mitrada Sinergy (PTMS) was asked to act transparently and objectively. PTPI is the owner of a coal land concession located in Luwe Hulu, North Barito, Central Kalimantan.

Executive Director of the Center of Energy and Resources Indonesia (CERI) Yusri Usman said, there were a number of irregularities in the case with case number: 254/Pdt.SusPKPU/2022/PN.Niaga.Jkt.Pst (PKPU No. 254).

"This case stems from the sale of shares of 27.5 percent belonging to Shareholders of Papa Idi to Mitrada Sinergy, based on the Memorandum of Understanding on Share Transfer Value Number 001/NKNPS/PTMS-PTPI/I/2011 dated January 24, 2011," he said in Jakarta, Tuesday, May 2.

Yusri explained, based on the information he obtained, it turned out that Mitrada Sinergy had not paid off the purchase of the shares to Padi Idi Shareholders.

"Surprisingly, Mitrada Sinergy even filed a PKPU lawsuit on the basis of the gradually paid share payment funds to me, reversing the fact that it is a personal debt of one of the holders (owners) of Padi Idi's shares," he explained.

He added that Mitrada Sinergy then filed a PKPU lawsuit against one of Padi Idi's shareholders named Bintoro Iduansjah on March 8, 2022 with the lawsuit number: 49/PDT.Sus-PKPU/2022/PN.Niaga.Jkt.Pst (PKPU No 49).

"There are a number of panel of judges handling the case, namely Duta Baskara (chief of the panel), Mochammad Djoenaidie (member judge), Kadarisman Al Riskandar (member judge), and Hartanto (substitute clerk)," said Yusri.

Surprisingly, continued Yusri, there were other applicants in this lawsuit, namely PT Petro Energy (PTPE) and PT Solusi Pandu Virtua (PTSPV).

"However, the decision in the PKPU case No 49 was rejected, one of the reasons was that the panel of judges assessed that the facts or circumstances of the PKPU respondent's debt as a debtor to the PKPU applicant as a creditor who had fallen in time and could be billed were proven not to be simple," he explained.

Yusri's statement was that because the first PKPU had been rejected, Mitrada Sinergy for the second time re-submitted PKPU to Bintoro Iduansjah on September 27, 2022 with case number: 254/Pdt.SusPKPU/2022/PN.Niaga.Jkt.Pst (PKPU No. 254).

The panel of judges in this trial were Mochammad Djoenaidie (chief judge of the assembly), Ambassador Baskara (member judge), Kadarisman Al Riskandar (member judge), Betsji Siske Manoe (supervisory judge), and Pipih Restiviani (substitute clerk).

"There has been a change in the composition of the presiding judge and substitute clerk, and there has been an addition to the supervisory judge," said Yusri Usman.

This lawsuit also includes other applicants, namely PT Petro Energy (PTPE), PT Solusi Pandu Virtua (PTSPV), Djojo Mandiri Raya People's Credit Bank and PT PADA Idi (PTPI).

"In this lawsuit, it is suspected that there are irregularities, where the subject matter is the same as the first PKPU lawsuit, but the results of the verdict are different, one of the reasons has been fulfilled and can be proven simply, therefore the application of the PKPU applicant is legal and can be granted," explained Yusri.

He commented, it was very odd because Bintoro Iduansjah never felt that he had a debt, in fact Mitrada Sinergy, who owed Bintoro Iduansjah because he had not paid off the purchase of Padi Idi's shares.

For your information, initially, Bintoro Iduansjah and The Budi Tedjo Prawiro owned 50 percent of their shares. Then on January 24, 2011, Bintoro Iduansjah and The Budi Tedjo Prawiro sold their shares in Pada Idi each with a portion of 27.5 percent to Mitrada Sinergy.

This is in accordance with the memorandum of understanding on the value of the transfer of shares between Mitrada Sinergy and Idi No: 001/NKNPS/PTMS-PTPI/I/2011, which was signed by Bintoro Iduansjah, The Budi Tedjo Prawiro, with Mitrada Sinergy represented by Newin Nugroho as the main director.

"I hope that this case gets special attention from other law enforcement officers. This case becomes interesting because there are parties who want to buy shares but don't want to pay, instead the party who wants to sell their shares is accused of having personal debt. Don't let this become a new mode of taking over companies belonging to other people by illegal means, "said Yusri Usman.