Arief Pramuhanto's Lawyer Uses the Results of the Examination of 4 Experts as a Basis to File a PK

JAKARTA - The legal ruling against the former President Director of PT Indofarma Tbk and also the President Commissioner of PT Indofarma Global Medika (IGM), Arief Pramuhanto, triggered sharp scrutiny from academics and legal practitioners. Four experts from across disciplines agreed that the verdict left serious issues and was very worthy of being reviewed through the Retrial (PK) mechanism.

This agreement emerged in the "Dissemination of the Examination of the Arief Pramuhanto Decision" event in Jakarta, Saturday, June 13. The four independent examiners assessed that there were fundamental weaknesses in the legal construction that ensnared the former top executive of the pharmaceutical state-owned enterprise.

For information, Arief Pramuhanto was sentenced to 13 years in prison and was charged with a fantastic substitute money of IDR 222.7 billion, a sub-sentence of 7 years in prison. In fact, throughout the trial, not a penny of funds flowed into Arief's personal account, there was no evidence of self-enrichment, nor conflicts of interest.

Criminal Law: It is not proven that there is evil intent (Mens Rea)

Professor of Criminal Law at the Faculty of Law, University of Indonesia (UI), Prof. Dr. Mudzakkir, S.H., M.H., emphasized that the main foundation of criminal liability is the existence of evil intent (mens rea). In this case, it was not proven.

"Without mens rea, an act cannot be punished. The construction of criminal liability here contains fundamental weaknesses, both in terms of authority, personal error, causal relationship, and the imposition of compensation without proof of economic benefits received by the defendant," said Prof. Mudzakkir.

Corporate Law: Responsibility of Two Mixed PTs

Corporate Law Expert, Dr. Hendry Julian Noor, S.H., M.Kn., highlighted the error in looking at corporate governance. He reminded that PT Indofarma Tbk and PT IGM are two different legal entities, so their responsibilities cannot be mixed.

As President Commissioner at PT IGM, Arief does not have full operational authority over the actions of the board of directors. Hendry also reminded the importance of looking at the context of the COVID-19 pandemic when policies are taken.

According to the Principle of Law: decisions in emergency situations must be judged based on the conditions at the time the decision is made (ex ante), not based on the results known later (hindsight bias).

Administrative Law: Business Mismanagement is Not Automatically Corruption

Former Head of the Study of State Administrative Law at FH UI (2013-2022), Dr. Dian Puji Simatupang, S.H., M.Kn., assessed that this case was purely in the realm of governance and business risk, not a criminal act of corruption.

"Not every maladministration or oversight weakness can be qualified as corruption without evidence of intentional abuse of authority to enrich oneself," explained Dian.

Forensic Audit: Business Risks Should Not Be Compared to State Losses

Senior auditor of the BPK RI, Dr. Eko Sembodo, S.E., M.M., M.Ak., CFrA, criticized the methodology of calculating state losses in this case. According to him, law enforcement officials must be vigilant in distinguishing between corporate losses (commercial losses) and actual state losses.

"Business risk or bad debts cannot automatically become a state loss without evidence of real and certain asset loss," said Eko. He also emphasized the importance of the principle of following the money to find out who is actually enjoying the flow of funds.

Legal Team Ready to Submit Review (PK)

Responding to the results of the compact examination from these experts, Arief Pramuhanto's legal representative, Firmansyah, stated that these findings would become a strong academic foundation and new ammunition to defend his client.

"This decision contains fundamental issues that deserve serious attention. The findings of the experts are one of the important bases in the effort of the Review (PK) that we will submit," said Firmansyah.

He hopes that this case can be a big reflection momentum for law enforcement in Indonesia, as well as provide legal certainty for professionals and managers of SOEs who are required to make quick decisions in times of crisis.