BPKP Ready To Appeal Decision On Corn Seed Corruption Audit Lawsuit

PHOTO VIA BETWEEN

MATARAM - The West Nusa Tenggara Representative Office of the BPKP stated that they are ready to file an appeal against the decision of a civil lawsuit at the Mataram District Court which annuls the results of the audit of state losses in the corruption case of the corn seed procurement project in 2017. Department of Agriculture and Plantation NTB.

"From the decision, we are ready to file an appeal," said the NTB Finance and Development Supervisory Agency (BPKP) Investigation Coordinator, Tukirin, as quoted by Antara, Tuesday, May 10.

As a form of readiness, he ensured that the NTB BPKP would immediately provide a statement of appeal to the court.

"We just received a copy of the verdict this morning. So, in the near future we will submit it. "There is still time until May 25," he said.

Regarding the preparation of the memorandum of appeal, his party coordinated with the BPKP in Jakarta.

"So, we cannot convey the material for the memorandum of appeal.

Regarding the steps taken by BPKP NTB to act as a defendant, Emil Siain, a legal adviser to the plaintiff Aryanto Prametu, Director of PT Sinta Agro Mandiri (SAM).

"If they file an appeal, we will automatically file an appeal as well. We will also prepare a counter memory," said Emil.

According to him, there are several judges' decisions that still need confirmation, one of which is regarding compensation for moral and material losses.

In his petition, Emil asked for moral and material losses on the results of the audit conducted by BPKP of Rp. 32.5 billion.

"This material and moral loss was granted by the panel of judges. However, there is no mention of the nominal figure such as the petitum that we proposed, that will be one of the ingredients," he said.

Regarding other statements in the verdict, such as ignoring the refund of state losses of Rp. 7.59 billion by the plaintiff, according to Emil, this is in line with the defense material at the trial at the first level at the Mataram Corruption Crime District Court.

"The basis for BPKP to conduct an audit is already regulated in BPKP Regulation Number 17 of 2017 concerning Guidelines for Management of Investigation Sector Activities. There may not be an audit agency that re-conducts calculations if there are initial audit results from others, such as the BPK or the inspectorate, " he said.

This means, he said, if there are findings from BPK RI whose returns are followed up by the Inspector General of the Ministry of Agriculture, investigators should still use the results as a reference in determining state losses.

"Instead of using the results of the BPKP audit. So, our client here is charged with two losses, even though the loss resulting from BPK's findings has been returned, this is again charged with the results of the BPKP based on a court decision," he said.

He also ensured that the returns at the government internal supervisory apparatus (APIP) level, in this case the Inspector General of the Ministry of Agriculture, were in accordance with applicable regulations.

"So, within 60 days of recovering losses at the APIP level, an agreement was born to return losses in 2 years in installments. It has been paid off and there is evidence of repayment," he said.