JAKARTA - The Research Cluster of the Law and Judicial System Research Institute of the Faculty of Law, University of Indonesia (FHUI) examined the Decision Number 102 Pid.Sus-TPK/2025/PN. Jkt on behalf of the defendant Muhamad Kerry Adrianto Riza. The result, the intervention allegedly carried out by Mohammad Riza Chalid as an oil entrepreneur was not proven.
As for the prosecutor's indictment to the Kerry case verdict, Riza Chalid through Irawan Prakoso was said to have pressured and intervened in Pertamina to rent the fuel terminal owned by PT Orbit Terminal Merak (OTM). However, experts concluded that there was no evidence to support such pressure.
"In fact, it has not been proven, right? It has not been proven that there is pressure from Mohamad Riza Chalid. It has not been proven that there is kickback or flow of personal funds to officials. It has not been proven," said FHUI professor who was one of the examiners, Topo Santoso in an examination session in Jakarta, Saturday, April 11.
In fact, the mens rea element in Articles 2 and 3 of the Tipikor Law must be in the form of intention or will en weten, namely knowing and wanting to commit a crime. Thus, he criticized the prosecutor and judge who relied on assumptions from the series of trial facts without concrete evidence.
The former Dean of FHUI also highlighted the weakness of the mens rea element. He assessed that without a logical motive for corruption, administrative errors due to market pressure cannot be equated with intention or dolus.
Moreover, in business practice, seeking profit through contracts is a legitimate thing so that failure or fluctuations are not automatically a crime.
"Well, how do you prove it, convince there is mens rea? According to me it is not really achieved here. So it is very weak. Without a logical motive of corruption, administrative errors due to market pressure cannot be equated with intention or dolus. So for example people do business, the business is the motive to make a profit. Yes, it is okay, with what? With contracts, with all sorts of things," he said.
He added that business meetings with banks or contract dynamics are normal in the business world and do not necessarily indicate corrupt intentions.
"So if, for example, there is a failure, or it is not successful, or it is still fluctuating and so on, then don't bring it up, 'oh there is a criminal act, there is a loss of state finances, and because there has been a meeting A with B, C with D, there is mens rea. Lah, people sometimes have to meet with banks, right? If I submit a proposal, I meet with the bank. Well, don't think it's mens rea, right," he said.
Meanwhile, Flora Dianti as another examiner also criticized the narrative of pressure from Mohamad Riza Chalid which has continued to be used since the indictment to the judge's decision.
"So, our conclusion, I say we because everything is related, that there is no sufficient legal fact that states or any evidence that supports the pressure of MRC (Mohamad Riza Chalid) through Irawan," said Flora.
Flora said that if the narrative of pressure was true, it should be explained what happened and who was involved. "If, for example, from the beginning I said that I signed this because I was pressured by 'Pak Choki'. Then what must be elaborated is when you meet 'Pak Choki', then when 'Choki' gives those pressures," he said.
"And it doesn't exist," Flora said.
Furthermore, Flora highlighted that the parties who were said to have intervened were never presented as witnesses. As a result, the claim of pressure only became a statement that stood alone without the support of other evidence.
Flora added that the revocation of the statement in the Investigation Report (BAP) actually weakened the evidence. He referred to the former Director of Marketing and Sales of Pertamina, Hanung Budya, who revoked his statement because there was an alleged intervention.
"Furthermore, what is even more gong is that I myself withdrew my statement in front of the trial. Oh, it turns out that it is not dong, I was not influenced. Well, then my statement that was different in the BAP was considered by the judge to be inconsistent. Well, then if it is inconsistent, it means that it cannot be proven that there is pressure," he said.
However, the panel of judges still used the BAP, which was considered a logical fallacy.
"Well, the problem in this case is that the judge actually said, 'Well, if you don't admit it now, the one you used to admit that I just took the BAP.' Well, that's wrong, it's called a logical fallacy. One, there is not one, yes, onvoldoende gemotiveerd is that there is no sufficient consideration. The evidence is not there," he said.
Flora also assessed the information regarding the intervention as still being testimonium de auditu or testimony from what was heard, including from Irawan Prakoso. Meanwhile, this figure along with Riza Chalid has never been present at the trial.
"Ini tidak ada satu pun yang mendukung hal itu. Jadi ini logical fallacy, ya sudah kalau gitu inkonsisten. Kalau inkonsisten artinya tidak usah digunakan. BAP-nya tidak digunakan, saksi keterangan persidangan juga enggak digunakan," jelasnya.
So, Flora concluded that there was no evidence of Riza Chalid's involvement or intervention in this case. "What does it mean? It means there is no intimidation or pressure. That's the point. It's not a shortcut to where, yes, I've only used those who support me," he said.
Flora also assessed the consideration of the panel of judges who still used BAP Hanung as forced. "That's why I said from the beginning, this is forced. The important thing is there is pressure, then I just look for anywhere in front of the trial I capcipcup who then supports me to take. Oh no, not in front of the trial, oh then I just take it from the investigation stage. Well that's what's called inconsistent. "
This examination is known to involve 10 legal experts, consisting of 9 academics from the University of Indonesia and 1 from Gadjah Mada University. Among them are Febby Mutiara Nelson, Rosa Agustina, Sri Laksmi Aninditas, Yetty Komalasari Dewi, Irmansyah, Hendry Julian Noor, Yuli Indrawati, Topo Santoso, Flora Dianti, and Choky Risda Ramadhan.
The study focuses on a number of issues grouped into several clusters, namely criminal law and criminal procedure law, civil law, corporate law, and public finance law.
The English, Chinese, Japanese, Arabic, and French versions are automatically generated by the AI. So there may still be inaccuracies in translating, please always see Indonesian as our main language. (system supported by DigitalSiber.id)
