Deputy Chairperson Of The KPK Johanis Tanak Feels Not Violating The Rules Despite One Event With Witness To The Bank EDC Case

Deputy Chairperson of the KPK Johanis Tanak admitted that he was confused about his presence at the same event as witnesses to the corruption case in the procurement of EDC machines. He admitted that he came there with the approval of other leaders.

This was conveyed by Johanis Tanak when asked about his presence at a corruption prevention event which was also attended by the President Director of the Red plate bank Pension Fund (Dapen), Ngatari on Tuesday, October 7.

Ngatari is known to have been examined as a witness in the corruption case in the procurement of state-owned bank EDC machines in 2020-2024 on Monday, October 6. He has also undergone examination at the KPK's Merah Putih building, Kuningan Persada, South Jakarta.

"What violates. My team and I come to carry out our duties according to the approval of our fellow leaders," Johanis said when confirmed to reporters, Friday, October 10.

Johanis also said that he violated, for example, the meeting had no official interest, such as conveying steps to prevent corruption.

"Violating if it comes without official interests and without the approval of the leadership (others, ed). The team and I came for official affairs and based on the leadership's approval."

Meanwhile, separately, former KPK investigator Yudi Purnomo said Article 36 of the KPK Law had actually stated that the KPK leadership should not meet with litigants for any purpose. This incident should not have happened.

The following is the full sound of the article:

"The leadership of the Corruption Eradication Commission is prohibited from: a. Having direct or indirect relationships with suspects or other parties who are related to corruption cases handled by the Corruption Eradication Commission for any reason."

"Article 36 of the KPK Law is firm. So the KPK leadership and staff should be more aware," said Yudi.

Yudi also explained that the witness was the object of another party mentioned in the article.

"It is also clear under any circumstances without any exceptions even though the seminar or open discussion attended by the audience," he said.

"So once again Article 36 must be condemned properly to avoid controversy or viral," he concluded.