Lawyer rejects KPK's appeal, asks judge to cancel Yaqut's suspect status

JAKARTA - The lawyer for former Minister of Religion Yaqut Cholil Qoumas rejected all the KPK's grounds for objection regarding the handling of the case on determining the Hajj quota. The lawyer asked the panel of judges to cancel the determination of the status of the suspect of the Hajj quota Yaqut.

The request was submitted by the head of the legal team, Yaqut, Mellisa Anggraeni, when presenting the petitum replik, during a trial at the South Jakarta District Court (PN), Wednesday, March 4.

"Declaring the rejection of the defendant's (the Indonesian Corruption Eradication Commission) appeal for all," said Mellisa.

"Declaring the KPK Leadership Decree Number 88 of 2026, dated January 8, 2026 concerning the Determination of the Suspect in the name of Yaqut Cholil Qoumas is invalid and has no binding legal force," he added.

In his petition, Yaqut asked the panel of judges to declare 4 letters related to the investigation of the quota and haj implementation case for 2023-2024 invalid. One of the four letters in question was the letter appointing Yaqut as a suspect.

"Declaring KPK Letter No: B/II/DIK.00/23/01.2026, Paragraph: Notification of the Determination of the Suspect, dated January 9, 2026 is not a letter of determination of the suspect on behalf of Yaqut Cholil Qoumas (Applicant), and is declared invalid and does not have binding legal force," said Yaqut's lawyer, Mellisa.

"All of which are the basis for the Respondent to make an effort to forcibly determine the suspect against the Applicant, are invalid and do not have binding legal force," he added.

As for the other 3 letters that were asked to be declared legally invalid, namely:

Letter of Investigation Order Number Sprin.Dik/61/DIK.00/01/08/2025 dated August 8, 2025;

Letter of Investigation Order Number Sprin.Dik/61A.2025/DIK.00/01/11/2025 dated November 21, 2025;

Letter of Investigation Order Number Sprin.Dik/01/Dik.00/01/01/2026 dated January 8, 2026,

In fact, Yaqut also asked the panel of judges to make a decision so that the KPK could not appoint him as a suspect in the same case later.

"Declaring all decisions or determinations or coercive attempts issued further by the Respondent relating to the determination of the suspect against the Applicant to be invalid," said Mellisa.

As previously reported, the legal team of Yaqut considered the determination of the suspect status for his client to be invalid. Because, according to Yaqut's lawyer, the investigation process against his client should be carried out by referring to the new KUHAP.

"The conditions and terms for the determination of suspects have not been met. The procedure for determining suspects does not comply with the provisions of the applicable criminal procedure law, and the authority of the Respondent in question in conducting the investigation and determining the Applicant as a suspect," said Mellisa in a trial at the South Jakarta District Court, Wednesday, March 4.

Mellisa explained that the determination of a suspect against Yaqut was invalid because of several things. One of them is about the letter of determination of a suspect that was not received by Yaqut until the end of February. In fact, the notification letter of the determination of the suspect had already been handed over to Yaqut.

"That from the Letter of Notification of Determination of Suspects submitted by the Respondent on Friday, January 9, 2026, the Determination of the Suspect against the Applicant has been carried out on January 8, 2026. However, until the date of this Pre-trial Application, the Applicant has not received the Letter of Determination of the Suspect as required by the provisions of Article 90 paragraph (2) of the Criminal Procedure Code," said Mellisa.

"That the model or way of notifying the letter of determination of a suspect who is only 'announced by number' in the Letter of Notification of Determination of a Suspect as done by the Respondent, clearly violates the basic rules (vide Article 90 paragraph (2) of the new Criminal Procedure Code)," he continued.

In addition, Mellisa also questioned the examination of Yaqut before being named a suspect. Because, according to him, his client had never been examined as a potential suspect.

"Because the Respondent never examined the Applicant as a potential suspect before designating him as a Suspect, the Respondent's actions have clearly contradicted the applicable provisions of criminal procedure law, and violated the principle of due process of law," said Mellisa.

During the trial, Yaqut's party also touched on the calculation of state losses in the alleged corruption case of quotas and the organization of the 2023-2024 hajj. Yaqut's lawyer team said the amount of state losses as conveyed by the KPK was not real.

"In addition, until this Answer Letter was submitted, we did not see a real and certain calculation of losses, including the absence of a date listed in the audit results when it was carried out or indeed it had not been completed," said Mellisa.