Nadiem Makarim Appeals 10-Year Prison Sentence

JAKARTA - The Minister of Education, Culture, Research, and Technology for the period 2019-2024, Nadiem Anwar Makarim, officially filed an appeal against the verdict in the Chromebook case to the Central Jakarta District Court.

Nadiem's lawyer, Zaid Mushafi, said in the appeal memo submitted, his party criticized the various considerations of the judge that were made in the Chromebook case verdict that dragged his client.

"In this appeal, we ask the panel of judges of the high court to re-hear, reopen the facts that were considered by the judge at the first level," said Zaid when met after submitting the appeal memorandum as reported by ANTARA, Wednesday, July 8.

He revealed one of the considerations of the judge in question, namely regarding the issuance of a power of attorney for the management of Nadiem's shares at PT Aplikasi Karya Anak Bangsa (AKAB) and PT Gojek Indonesia to other parties.

According to him, the granting of a power of attorney by Nadiem is actually a form of avoidance of conflicts of interest in procurement, but the panel of judges instead assessed that the power of attorney was only a formality used to protect conflicts of interest.

He claimed that in the facts of the trial, all witnesses and evidence examined had unequivocally stated that Nadiem had never given any orders to the power of attorney.

"There is no material factual evidence that states that there is an order or coordination. There is any permission or notification regarding the granting of the power of attorney. So this is one part of the appeal memo that we submitted," he said.

In addition, he conveyed another thing that was questioned, namely the assessment of the panel of judges of the first instance court on the election of officials at the Ministry of Education and Culture.

Zaid said the selection process for the official was carried out through a selection committee so that there was no intervention from his client.

Moreover, he said, the selection process had already occurred in March 2020. While the formation of the technical team for the procurement of Chromebooks was carried out at the end of April 2020.

Furthermore, it was revealed that the appeal also questioned the compensation of Rp809.59 billion imposed on his client.

Based on the documents and facts of the trial, he said, there was no intervention from Nadiem when the money flowed into PT AKAB and there was no evidence that the materiel money went into his client's personal pocket.

"Don't make excuses 'oh it doesn't have to be received by Mr. Nadiem, it can also be to corporations or others'. Yes, if that is proven, what is Mr. Nadiem's role in receiving it," said Zaid.

In the case of alleged corruption in the education digitization program in the form of the procurement of Chromebook laptops and Chrome Device Management (CDM) in the Ministry of Education and Culture environment in 2019-2022, Nadiem was sentenced to 10 years in prison after being proven to have committed corruption.

In addition to imprisonment, he was also sentenced to a fine of Rp. 1 billion, subsider 190 days in prison and compensation of Rp. 809.59 billion subsider 5 years in prison.

The substitute money was imposed on Nadiem after it was proven that he had received Rp809.59 billion in money from PT Aplikasi Karya Anak Bangsa (PT AKAB) through PT Gojek Indonesia. Most of PT AKAB's money came from Google's investment of US$786.99 million.

In that case, Nadiem was proven to have abused his authority, causing a loss of state finances worth IDR 1.56 trillion.

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

The actions of the founder of one of the technology companies were stated to have been carried out, among others, together with three other defendants who had been sentenced in different trials, namely Ibrahim Arief alias Ibam, Mulyatsyah and Sri Wahyuningsih, as well as Jurist Tan, who is currently still at large.

Thus, Nadiem was proven to have violated the crime stipulated in Article 3 in conjunction with Article 18 of Law (UU) Number 31 of 1999 concerning the Eradication of Corruption as amended and supplemented by Law Number 20 of 2001 jo. Article 55 paragraph (1) of the Criminal Code.