AGO Names Riza Chalid As Pertamina's Oil Governance Suspect

The Attorney General's Office (AGO) has named nine suspects in the alleged corruption case of crude oil governance and refinery products at PT Pertamina Persero Sub Holding-KKKS for the period 2018-2023. One of them is Muhammad Riza Chalid (MRC) as Beneficial Owner of PT Orbit Terminal Merak.

"From the results of the marathon investigation with the number of witnesses as stated, the investigative team concluded that sufficient evidence had been obtained to determine 9 suspects," said the Director of Investigation at the Attorney General's Office, Abdul Qohar, to reporters, Thursday, June 10.

Meanwhile, other suspects, namely Alfian Nasution (AN) as Vice President of Supply and Head Office Distribution of PT Pertamina 2011-2015; Hanung Budya Marityanta (HB) as Director of Marketing and Commerce of PT Pertamina 2014; and Toto Nugroho (TN) as Vice President Integrated Supply Change in 2017-2018.

Then Dwi Sudarsono (DS) as Vice President and Product Head of PT Pertamina Persero 2018-2020; Martin Haendra Nata (MH) as PT Travigura's Development Manager for 2019-2021; Indra Putra Harsono (IP) as Mahameru Kencana Abadi Development Manager Business; and MRC as Beneficial Owner of PT Orbit Terminal Merak.

They were named as suspects because they were suspected of making direct appointments to the Merak fuel terminal with a high rental price that did not benefit Pertamina. In addition, formulate for Pertalite products are illegal.

"Their actions contradict a number of rules, including Law Number 22 of 2001 concerning Oil and Gas, Law Number 30 of 2007 concerning Energy, Limited Company Law, and Minister of State-Owned Enterprises regarding good corporate governance," said Qohar.

Currently, eight suspects have been detained for the next 20 days. However, Riza Chalid has not been detained because he is still in Singapore.

"Investigators will be detained for the next 20 days starting on July 10, 2025 today," he said.

For their actions, the suspects are suspected of violating Article 2 paragraph (1) or Article 3 in conjunction with Article 18 of the Corruption Crime Law in conjunction with Article 55 paragraph (1) 1 of the Criminal Code.