Comments On State Losses In The Asabri Case, Expert: Misperception, Not In Accordance With Theory

JAKARTA - The audit or calculations by the Indonesian Financial Supervisory Agency (BPK) in the alleged corruption case of PT Asabri, which led to the conclusion that state losses amounted to Rp.

Previously in the trial of this case some time ago, expert witness Dian Puji Simatupang stated that the source of investment funds which later became a problem in Asabri came from the contributions of members of the TNI-Polri, separate from state finances. So, according to him, it will not cause any loss to the state.

However, both the BPK and the Prosecutor's Office have one package and one perception of state losses which amounted to Rp22.788 trillion. Although many have explained that such a conclusion is not true.

Responding to this, the Criminal Law expert at the University of Muhammadiyah Jakarta (UMJ), Chairul Huda said that in fact the difference in perception related to state financial losses in the PT Asabri case had occurred for a long time.

He claimed to have the same opinion as Dian Puji Simatupang, that Asabri's finances were not a state financial loss.

"Here, BPK and Pak Dian have different perceptions. I myself agree with Pak Dian, because the funds in Asabri are not state finances," Chairul told reporters on Tuesday, December 7, 2021.

According to him, perceptions related to the fact of state losses were judged incorrectly.

"This proves Pak Dian's view is correct, if the loss must be fixed (real and definite in amount)," Chairul Huda added.

Furthermore, Chairul said that in this case it could be processed under general criminal law, not corruption.

"There could be a crime, but a general crime or a crime in the Insurance Law," he said.

Then, he said that in law enforcement the Asabri case had problems in the perception of state losses which did not match the theory.

"The problem is the perception (of state losses), it doesn't match the theory, but he wants to be the ruler (the Attorney General's Office)," said Chairul Huda.

Meanwhile, Gadjah Mada University (UGM) Law Expert, Muhammad Fatahillah Akbar, said that there must be an affirmation of the separation of state finances and Asabri's contributions, whether they are included in state financial funds as described in Law Number 17 of 2003 or not.

In addition, Akbar said that there must be other relevant and competent auditors to say whether the funds included state losses, so that BPK would not be the sole player in calculating the alleged state losses in this case.

"It is better if BPKP can also assess. In addition, the Honorary Council of the BPK Code of Ethics should carry out waskat," he said.

Akbar assessed that in stock investment, there should be supervision and security of stock prices so as not to harm third parties.

However, according to him, in handling the ASABRI case, if it refers to Law 30 of 2014 concerning Government Administration, then administrative sanctions should be carried out first. In addition, the return of state losses is prioritized, not just corporal punishment.

The same thing was previously conveyed by human rights activist and legal practitioner Haris Azhar, that in his view regarding cases such as ASABRI or Jiwasraya, it was clear that the government only wanted to enforce the law without the desire to provide legal certainty.

According to Haris Azhar, the government did not consider the long-term impact on third parties or victims affected by this case.

"There are many third parties who have lost their rights because the government just wants to carry out the legal process, but there is no protection for third parties and provides legal certainty," said Haris, recently.