Code BC1 Appears in Blueray Session, Expert Requests Proof of Rp21 Billion Money Recipient

JAKARTA - Intelligence Counter Analysis Specialist, R. Gautama Wiranegara reminded that the existence of codes in the company's internal records does not automatically prove the direct receipt of money by the party whose name is associated.

This was conveyed by Gautama after the boss of PT Blueray Cargo, John Field, confirmed the existence of codes BC1, BC2, and BC3 in the company's payment records in a trial at the Jakarta Corruption Court, Friday, June 12.

Code BC1 is intended for Director General of Customs and Excise Djaka Budhi; code BC2 refers to Rizal as the Director of Enforcement and Investigation of the Directorate General of Customs and Excise (DJBC) period 2024 to January 2026, and BC3 for Sisprian Subiaksono as the Head of the P2 Intelligence Sub-Directorate of the DJBC.

"What must be answered is not who is mentioned in the code but who actually received the money," Gautama told reporters in a written statement, Monday, June 15.

Gautama said John Field's testimony at the trial must be viewed in its entirety. Because, the businessman admitted that he did not see the process of handing over money to the party mentioned in the payment code.

"John confirmed the code and explanation he received from Orlando Hamonangan. It is different from seeing the money received by the final recipient," he said.

Gautama further highlighted another fact that emerged in the previous trial on May 20, 2026. At that time, Orlando Hamonangan was said to have explained the existence of envelopes with code numbers 1, 2, and 3.

However, Orlando admitted that he did not know who the final recipient of the coded envelope 1 was. During the trial, it was also revealed that the envelope was handed over to Rizal.

"The fact that emerged at that time actually said that the code 1 envelope was handed over to Rizal. This is a very important fact and should not be ignored," he said.

Therefore, according to Gautama, there are still a chain of evidence that must be opened in the case.

"If on June 12 John mentioned the BC1 code based on Orlando's explanation while on May 20 Orlando himself admitted not knowing the final recipient of code 1 and the envelope was in Rizal, then the proof is not complete," he said.

In the perspective of counterintelligence, this condition can lead to a phenomenon called authority laundering. That is, the use of the name of high officials by certain parties to provide legitimacy for requests for money.

"In this practice, the name of the superior is often used as a tool to pressure business actors. Therefore, the existence of the code does not automatically prove acceptance by the party whose name is associated with the code," explained Gautama.

He said investigators needed to prove whether the money was actually passed on, who handed it over, who received it, and whether there was any communication or flow of funds that could confirm the final receipt.

"Did Rizal continue the envelope? Were there witnesses who saw the final delivery? Was there any communication showing approval? Was there an asset flow that could be traced? All of that must be proven," he said.

"John's belief that money is indeed important. But criminal law does not stop at beliefs. The law requires evidence that shows who actually received and enjoyed the benefits of the money," continued Gautama.

Gautama also asked the public to keep the Blueray Cargo case in the corridor of the presumption of innocence until the entire chain of evidence is revealed at the trial.

"The figure of Rp. 21 billion is indeed large and attracts attention. But large numbers should not drown out the most basic questions in this case, namely who the ultimate recipient is. Until that is answered with strong evidence, the process of proving is still ongoing," concluded Gautama.