Three Former Members of the Ministry of Trade's Cart Project Cause State Losses of IDR 39.4 Billion

Three former members of the Working Group for the Procurement of Trading Cart at the Ministry of Trade in the reading of the indictment at the Corruption Court at the Jakpus PN, Thursday (11/6/2026). (ANTARA/Agatha Olivia Victoria)

JAKARTA - A total of three former members of the Working Group for the Procurement of Trading Cart at the Ministry of Trade (Kemendag) were charged with causing state losses of IDR 39.4 billion.

The three are State Civil Servants (ASN) from the Ministry of Trade, including Bani Ikhsan as Head of the Pokja I Team, Yusmito as Head of the Pokja II Team, and Ryno Hilham Akbar as a Pokja member.

"The defendants have committed legal acts with the aim of enriching themselves, others, a corporation," said Public Prosecutor (JPU) from the Attorney General's Office Muhammad Fadil Paramajeng at the reading of the indictment in the Corruption Court at the Jakpus PN, Thursday, June 11.

The JPU said the three acts against the law were carried out to enrich Bani worth Rp680 million or Bani admitted worth Rp80 million and PT Piramida Dimensi Milenia worth Rp39.4 billion.

The explanation for the profit of IDR 39.4 billion was derived from the difference between the payment from the state of IDR 44.5 billion and the actual production costs of IDR 5.09 billion.

For their actions, the defendants are threatened with criminal penalties as provided for in Article 603 jo. Article 20 letter C of the National Criminal Code or Article 3 or Article 5 paragraph (2) jo. Article 18 of Law Number 31 of 1999 concerning the Eradication of Corruption as amended and supplemented by Law Number 20 of 2001.

In the case of alleged corruption in the procurement of business assistance for trading carts at the Ministry of Trade in the period 2017-2019, the JPU revealed that in September 2008, Bani, allegedly intentionally accepted or approved a request from Putu Indra Wijaya as the Commitment Maker Official (PPK) to condition the selection process for suppliers so that the company was controlled by two suppliers of goods and services, namely Bambang Widianto, and Mashur.

Thus, PT Piramida Dimensi Milenia (PDM) and PT Arjuna Putra Bangsa (APB) can be winners of the 2018 procurement of carts.

From the beginning, Bani knew that the agreement was against the principle of independence and objectivity of the election committee, but he still accepted it.

Then, Bani together with Ryno attended a separate and secret meeting with Putu, which was not attended by other members of the pokja, to discuss the preparation of the Work Framework (KAK) as a result of the review (review) whose content was legally made different from the results of the official review meeting.

"The purpose of this meeting is to engineer the requirements of the provider so that PT PDM Kerja Sama Operasional (KSO) PT APB can pass even though the company does not have the necessary industrial business permit equipment and experience," said the JPU.

The JPU continued, Bani also prepared the selection documents using the KAK results of the review which had been engineered by Putu, even though Bani knew that the KAK results of the review were different from the official re-study meeting minutes.

In addition, KAK was also deliberately engineered to accommodate PT PDM KSO PT APB which did not have the qualification of changing the requirements that were accommodated in the election.

Not only that, the JPU revealed that Bani also did not clarify the IP address of the auction participants, even though Bani should have known that there were similarities in the IP addresses used by several auction participants.

Disclosed by the prosecutor, the similarity of IP is a strong indication of collusion between auction participants which must be followed up with clarification.

"However, the defendant Bani deliberately did not clarify this and continued the evaluation process because from the beginning the defendant had agreed to win the company," said the JPU.

After that, Bani also passed the auction participants who did not meet the technical administrative requirements.

In fact, the bid documents of PT PDM and PT APB in the methodology section do not contain an explanation of the methodology for implementing accessory work (gas stoves, gas tubes, and regulator hoses) so that they should not pass the administrative evaluation.

PT PDM and PT APB in essence do not have their own production equipment workshops, their own business permits, the necessary labor, and the supporting company support letters attached.

"It's just an administrative formality and the defendant Bani knows about this," said the prosecutor.

As a result of Bani's intervention, PT PDM and PT APB were determined as the winners of the auction with the highest score of 85.65 or passed so that a contract agreement was then signed with a contract value of IDR 49.69 billion for the procurement of 7,200 carts within 75 calendar days.

In return for Bani's series of actions, Mashur, at the direction of Bambang, gave Bani money in stages in the form of cash through intermediaries amounting to Rp680 million, which Bani admitted was only received a portion of Rp80 million.

The JPU emphasized that Bani's series of actions was an inseparable causal chain from the emergence of state financial losses.

The reason is, without the determination of PT PDM KSO PT APB as the winner of the auction by the selection committee, which is headed by Bani, there will be no signing of the procurement contract.

Without the signing of a contract by the PPK, there will be no basis for payment to the provider from the state treasury.

Thus, the JPU suspects that the entire series of actions, from the manipulation of the KAK, the establishment of a flag company, the creation of a false Report of Transfer (BAST), to the disbursement of funds, is the implementation of a common evil intention that has been agreed upon from the beginning between Bani, Putu, Bambang, and Mashur.

"Here, the defendant Bani made a real contribution as the head of the pokja who has the formal authority to determine the winner of the auction," said the prosecutor.