Prosecutor Worried that the Results of the Audit of the Nadiem Case Will be Abused Outside the Court

JAKARTA - Public prosecutor (JPU) from the Attorney General's Office (Kejagung) Roy Riady admitted that he was worried that the Investigation Report (LHP) of the calculation of state losses related to the Nadiem Anwar Makarim case would be misused if it was given to Nadiem's party outside the trial.

He said his party wanted evidence, including the LHP of state losses in the case, to be presented only in the trial, not outside the trial.

"So we are here just showing. If the panel of judges agrees to order the provision of LHP to the legal advisor or the defendant, we ask for its determination so that we can carry it out," said the prosecutor in the reading of the interim judgment of the panel of judges at the Jakarta Corruption Court, Monday, January 12.

Roy explained that in Article 216 paragraph (1) of the new Criminal Procedure Code (KUHAP), the public prosecutor, with the permission of the presiding judge, only shows the defendant all the evidence and asks the defendant whether the evidence is relevant or not.

He said that according to the new Article 142 of the Criminal Procedure Code, the suspect and/or the defendant do not have the right to receive evidence or copies of it from the public prosecutor.

"Therefore, we only provide a report on the results of the audit of the calculation of state financial losses in the case with the number PE.03.03/R/SP/92920 in 2025 on November 4, 2025 from BPKP to the panel of judges to be shown to the defendant in front of the trial," said the prosecutor.

When reading the interim ruling, the panel of judges ordered the JPU to submit a list of evidence and a report on the results of the audit of the Financial and Development Supervisory Agency (BPKP) or other financial audit documents to the Minister of Education, Culture, Research, and Technology for the period 2019-2024 before entering the stage of proof.

The order of the panel of judges aims to fulfill the defendant's right to a fair trial and to guarantee the defendant's right to defend, including reverse proof, as stipulated in Articles 37 and 37A of the Corruption Law as well as for the smooth examination of the case.

In the case of alleged corruption in the education digitization program in the form of the procurement of Chromebook laptops and Chrome Device Management in the environment of the Ministry of Education and Culture in 2019-2022, Nadiem was accused of corruption that had caused losses to the state treasury of IDR 2.18 trillion, which was the result of the calculation of the BPKP.

Corruption, among others, was carried out by carrying out the procurement of learning facilities based on information and communication technology with laptops Chromebook and CDM for the 2020, 2021, and 2022 fiscal years not in accordance with the procurement planning and procurement principles.

The alleged act was carried out together with three other defendants who have been tried, namely Ibrahim Arief alias Ibam, Mulyatsyah, and Sri Wahyuningsih, as well as Jurist Tan, who is currently still at large.

In detail, the losses caused by the state include Rp1.56 trillion related to the education digitization program at the Ministry of Education and Culture, as well as 44.05 million US dollars or the equivalent of Rp621.39 billion due to the procurement of CDM that is not necessary and not useful in the education digitization program.

With this act, Nadiem is suspected of having received money amounting to IDR 809.59 billion originating from PT Aplikasi Karya Anak Bangsa (PT AKAB) through PT Gojek Indonesia.

It is stated that most of PT AKAB's money comes from Google's investment of US$786.99 million.

This can be seen from Nadiem's wealth which is recorded in the LHKPN in 2022, namely there is an acquisition of property in the form of securities worth IDR 5.59 trillion.

For his actions, the former Minister of Education and Culture is threatened with a criminal penalty as stipulated in Article 2 paragraph (1) or Article 3 in conjunction with Article 18 of Law Number 31 of 1999 concerning Eradication of Corruption as amended and supplemented by Law Number 20 of 2001 jo. Article 55 paragraph (1) of the Criminal Code.