Legal Process in the Spotlight, the Pre-Trial of Former Foreign Minister Yaqut Bakal Be Granted?

JAKARTA - The pretrial hearing of former Minister of Religion Yaqut Cholil Qoumas is almost entering the final round. How big is the chance that Yaqut's pretrial application will be granted?

Yaqut as Minister of Religion was named a suspect by the KPK in the alleged corruption case in determining the quota and the implementation of the 2023-2024 hajj. Yaqut 'fought' by filing a pretrial application to the South Jakarta District Court (PN).

Yaqut filed a pretrial application on Tuesday, February 10 and was registered with case number: 19/Pid.Pra/2026/PN JKT.SEL. The first hearing was held on March 3 with the agenda of reading the reading of the motion.

In his plea, Yaqut considered that the KPK violated the new KUHAP when it appointed him as a suspect in the Hajj quota case. Yaqut only received a notification letter of the appointment of the suspect dated January 9, 2026.

In fact, in the provisions of Article 90 paragraph (2) and (3) of the Criminal Procedure Code, it is only stipulated that the determination of a suspect must be stated in a letter of determination of a suspect signed by the investigator and notified to the suspect no later than one day after the letter is issued.

Apart from the new violation of the Criminal Procedure Code, there are a number of arguments that serve as the basis for the pre-trial application because the determination of the suspect is considered invalid. The arguments in question, ranging from the absence of calculation of state losses to the issue of the hajj quota not being a state financial loss.

In the reply, Yaqut's legal team emphasized that the report on the calculation of state losses was the 'key' in determining the suspects in the Hajj quota case. But in reality, until the pretrial application was filed, the Yaqut party admitted that they did not know about the report.

The evidence of the Yaqut legal team is consistent with the testimony of experts presented at the trial. Criminal law expert Mahrus Ali agreed that the state's losses must be completed before the determination of suspects.

"So if we refer to the new Criminal Code, it says that there is a loss. For the delict to be proven in the article on corruption, the loss of the state, the delict is said to be voltooid (complete) when there is an investigative audit that confirms that there has been a financial loss to the state. If there is none, the delict has not been voltooid (complete)," said Mahrus at the trial.

Mahrus explained that the corruption case that ensnared Yaqut was a material offense. Where the investigation of the case was carried out because of the consequences that arose, in this case was the loss of the state.

The fact that the audit of state losses is still being processed when the letter of determination of a suspect against Yaqut was signed, was confirmed by experts who were presented by the KPK as the respondent party.

During the trial, an expert from the Financial Audit Agency (BPK) who served as Head of the Central State Financial Investigation Audit, Najmatuzzahrah, revealed the state's loss report in the Hajj quota case that ensnared Yaqut had just been completed by the end of February 2026.

"The LHP (Report of the Results of the Investigation) was dated 20, it was submitted on February 24," he said in court.

This means that the audit was completed more than a month after the determination of the suspect status. Yaqut himself was designated as a suspect on January 8, 2026.

Another fact revealed about the letter of determination of the suspect. Legal expert on state administration Oce Madril assessed that the determination of the suspect against Yaqut was legally flawed because it was signed by the head of the KPK.

In fact, based on the new KPK Law, the KPK leadership no longer has the authority as an investigator.

"I think no, because earlier, if Article 21 of Law Number 19 of 2019, the new KPK Law, because the leadership no longer has attributive authority as investigators, then it has no authority. So what do you want to distribute like that? So there is nothing to distribute," said the lecturer from Gajah Mada University.

During the trial process, the authority of the Minister of Religion in determining the allocation of the Hajj quota was also emphasized. The state administrative law expert who was presented from the KPK, Emanuel Sujatmoko, said that the authority of the Minister of Religion to determine the allocation of the Hajj quota was regulated in the Minister's Regulation.

"That means this. If it is in the law, it will be added to the quota for Hajj, for example, yesterday it was 100, now it became 125, for example. Then this is regulated in the minister's regulation. Then the minister's regulation is interpreted as a regulation because it is ordered by a higher regulation if we refer to Article 8 of Law 12 (2011)," said Emanuel in the trial.

What Emanuel said was in line with the argument of Yaqut's legal team who emphasized that the Decree of the Minister of Religion (KMA) 130/2024 did not meet the requirements for sufficient evidence regarding the accusation of acts against the law/abuse of authority.

The Minister of Religion was emphasized by Yaqut's lawyer to carry out the duties of organizing the hajj based on Law Number 8 of 2019 concerning the Implementation of the Hajj and Umrah, including by considering the conditions on the ground for the smooth and safety of the congregation, and based on the international agreement Ta'limatul Hajj which lists the allocation of additional quotas for the Regular Zone 10,000 and the Special Zone 10,000.

In the midst of the pretrial process, the spotlight on the handling of the Hajj quota case came from a number of parties.

Former Corruption Eradication Commission (KPK) investigator, in his view, the determination of the status of a suspect against Yaqut is weak.

"It's weak (the designation of the suspect Yaqut, ed) because the KPK, from the beginning I said, there should be a suspect first. So, the KPK also ends up designating a suspect, what is the point, working twice," Yudi told reporters.

Another gap that Yudi mentioned related to state losses, including the issue of the hajj quota is a state facility. Yudi also highlighted the issue of the decline in state losses based on the audit of the Financial Audit Agency (BPK).

The KPK in the pretrial hearing opened the BPK's findings in this case. It is stated that the state's losses amounted to IDR 622 billion, although initially the KPK was making a fuss about saying that the state's losses amounted to IDR 1 trillion.

"That is also a gap," said Yudi, who is also a former Head of the KPK Employee Unit (WP).

On the other hand, the National Commission for Hajj and Umrah questioned the calculation of state losses due to alleged corruption in the haj quota. Komnas questioned the status of the haj quota, which includes the state's finances or not.

"There are many questions, for example, because we don't have the documents, for example, the question of the layman is where the figure of Rp. 600 billion is, right? How do you calculate it? Yes, right?" said Chairman of the National Commission for Hajj and Umrah Mustolih Siradj.

The quota for Hajj, explained Mustolih, is a gift from the Saudi government to the Indonesian government. Where, the number can be reduced or increased every year.

Therefore, it would be very risky if the Hajj quota was considered as state finances without special rules regulating it.

"Second, if he is our state finances, try to quota in 2024, 2023, 2022 or whenever it is, 2025, then 2026 for example is not used, it is burned, right? If it is burned, who is to blame? It means it is detrimental to the country. Yes, right, because it is not used, right? Yes, right," said Mustolih.