Lawyer Karen Agustiawan: KPK Indictment Wrongly And Contradictively

The trial of reading the objection note or exception of former Pertamina Galaila President Director Karen Kardinah alias Karen Agustiawan at the Corruption/ANTARA/Fath Putra Mulya Court

JAKARTA - Legal adviser to the President Director of PT Pertamina (Persero) for the 2009 period 2014 Galaila Karen Kardinah alias Karen Agustiawan assessed that the indictment of the Public Prosecutor (JPU) of the Corruption Eradication Commission (KPK) was wrong and contradictory.

This was read out by the legal adviser as one of the points of conclusion for his client's objection or exception, Karen Agustiawan, in the alleged corruption case in the procurement of liquefied natural gas (LNG) at Pertamina in 2011 2014.

"The preparation of the indictment is also wrong and contradictory, especially regarding the defendant's actions," said one of Karen Agustiawan's legal advisory team, Jeffry A. Suryatin at the Corruption Court (Tipikor) at the Central Jakarta District Court, Jakarta, as reported by ANTARA, Monday, February 19.

According to legal counsel, the indictment was contradictory because the KPK prosecutor stated that the defendant "provided approval", but in the other part the defendant was said to have committed an act of "wanted to buy gas", and there was also a narrative that the defendant "ordered the purchase of LNG".

"This is an obscuur or vague formulation," Jeffry said.

In addition, legal adviser Karen Agustiawan stated that the indictment was not careful, clear, and complete in describing the elements resulting in state financial losses because the indictment was deemed not to explain clearly the actions of the defendant.

In this case, legal counsel argued that the basis for the purchase of LNG Corpus Christi Liquefaction was signed by the board of directors who took office after Karen Agustiawan. Therefore, legal advisers believe that his client is not involved in the act that is detrimental to the state's finances.

Not only that, the Karen Agustiawan camp also argued that the investigation and pre-prosecution by the KPK was a juridical defect. Investigation actions are said to violate the principles of honest, objective, and impartial justice.

"Because the defendant's right to seek and submit witnesses and or experts who benefit him have been violated in the investigation process," said the legal adviser.

On this basis, legal adviser Karen Agustiawan appealed to the Jakarta Corruption Court panel of judges to declare that the KPK prosecutor's indictment was canceled for the sake of law or could not be accepted, so that the case was not investigated further and the defendant was released from custody.

"Declare that the indictment of the Public Prosecutor's Team Number: 31/TUT.01.04/24/02/2024 dated February 2, 2024 is null and void; or declare the Prosecutor's Indictment Letter Number: 31/TUT.01.04/24/02/2024 dated February 2, 2024 as an unacceptable indictment," said the legal adviser.

In this case, Karen Agustiawan was charged with causing state losses of 113.84 million United States (US) dollars or equivalent to Rp1.77 trillion due to alleged corruption in the procurement of liquefied natural gas or LNG at Pertamina in 2011 2014.

The indictment is based on the Investigative Audit Report of the Supreme Audit Agency (BPK) of the Republic of Indonesia in the context of calculating state losses for the procurement of LNG US company, Corporate Christi Liquefaction LLC (CCL) in Pertamina and other relevant agencies Number: 74/LHP/XXI/12/2023 dated December 29, 2023.

Karen was charged with enriching herself amounting to Rp1.09 billion and 104,016 US dollars or equivalent to Rp1.62 billion. Karen was also charged with enriching a corporation, namely CCL worth 113.84 million US dollars or equivalent to Rp1.77 trillion, which resulted in state financial losses.

In addition, Karen was charged with granting approval for gas business development at several potential LNG refineries in the US without any clear procurement guidelines and only granting principle permits without the support of basic justification, technical and economic analysis, as well as risk analysis.

Karen is also said to have not asked for a written response from the Pertamina Board of Commissioners and approval of the General Meeting of Shareholders (GMS) before the signing of the LNG CCL Train 1 and Train 2 buying and selling agreement, as well as providing power.