Money Laundering Expert Outlines Alleged Laundering Scheme in Ex-Jampidsus Case

TPPU expert, Yenti Garnasih, in a public discussion "Uncovering the Corruption Network Behind the Ex-Jampidsus Case: Who is the Actor? Who benefits?" in Jakarta, Friday, August 7, 2026. (VOI)

JAKARTA - Money Laundering Criminal Expert (TPPU), Yenti Garnasih, emphasized that the disclosure of alleged corruption crimes (Tipikor) and money laundering crimes (TPPU) that ensnared the former Deputy Attorney General for Special Crimes (Jampidsus), Febrie Adriansyah, must be preceded by proof of the predicate crime. According to him, the element of TPPU cannot be proven without first proving the existence of a crime that produces the proceeds of crime.

Yenti made the statement during a discussion held by the Indonesian Youth Congress Association entitled "Unmasking the Corruption Network Behind the Ex-Jampidsus Case: Who is the Actor? Who benefits?" in Jakarta, Friday, August 7.

According to Yenti, the series of cases began with the alleged problem of coal supply to the steam power plant (PLTU) that emerged after the blackout incident in the Sumatra region. He said the alleged modus operandi that developed included reducing the volume and technical engineering in fulfilling coal supplies.

In the development of the investigation, continued Yenti, investigators conducted searches at a number of locations and found large amounts of cash and gold bars. The matter was then also linked to alleged corruption in a number of other cases, including PT Asabri and PT Krakatau Steel.

Yenti emphasized that in the TPPU case, investigators must first be able to prove the original criminal act as stipulated in Law Number 8 of 2010 concerning the Prevention and Eradication of Money Laundering Crimes.

"TPPU is impossible if it is not preceded by the original criminal act. Therefore, investigators and prosecutors must be able to explain the original criminal act as referred to in Article 2 paragraph (1) of the TPPU Law," said Yenti.

He explained that TPPU is basically the act of placing, transferring, paying, bequeathing, gifting, or taking other actions on property that is known or suspected to have come from the proceeds of a criminal act.

According to Yenti, if the perpetrator comes from the ranks of state organizers or public officials, this condition can be a consideration for criminal charges. However, investigators must still prove that all seized assets actually come from the proceeds of criminal acts.

"The results of the investigation in the form of money and gold bars must be confirmed to have come from the results of a crime and be associated with the original crime as stipulated in Article 2 paragraph (1) of the TPPU Law," he said.

Yenti assessed that handling cases involving high officials requires greater caution due to the complexity of proof and the high level of public attention.

"As someone who is familiar with money laundering, I believe that investigators have worked very carefully because this case involves important officials. Therefore, the public should provide support for the ongoing law enforcement process," he said.

He also reminded investigators and public prosecutors to ensure that at least two pieces of evidence are fulfilled before designating someone as a suspect. According to him, this aspect will be an important basis for proof in trials and when facing a formal test through pretrial.

"The Public Prosecutor must be careful in determining the two pieces of evidence because it will become the basis of proof at trial," said Yenti.

In addition, Yenti explained that searches in TPPU cases are generally carried out based on reliable information regarding the existence of property that is suspected of originating from the results of criminal acts. Therefore, this action is a legal step as long as it is based on sufficient evidence and information.

Yenti also highlighted the pattern of storing cash and gold bars found by investigators. According to him, storing assets of great value in unusual locations can be one of the indicators that should be investigated in the perspective of money laundering.

"In normal logic, money derived from legitimate activities is generally deposited through the banking system. Likewise, gold is usually stored in official storage locations, not in hidden locations. Therefore, this type of storage pattern should be examined in the investigation process," said Yenti.

The discussion featured a number of speakers from various fields, namely TPPU expert Yenti Garnasih, business law expert from Bina Nusantara University (Binus) Muhammad Reza Syarifuddin Zaki, former KPK investigator Yudi Purnomo Harahap, and postgraduate lecturer in Political Science from National University (Unas) Firdaus Syam.

The activity was attended by participants from various circles, ranging from student representatives, youth organizations, researchers, practitioners, to the general public. The forum aims to encourage public participation in monitoring the handling of alleged Tipikor and TPPU cases so that it takes place in a transparent, professional, and accountable manner.