4 People Prevented From Going Abroad Regarding Alleged Corruption At LPEI

DOC VOI

JAKARTA - The Corruption Eradication Commission (KPK) has asked the Directorate General of Immigration at the Ministry of Law and Human Rights (Kemenkumham) to prevent four people from leaving the country. This effort was carried out in connection with allegations of corruption in the provision of credit facilities from the Indonesian Export Financing Agency (LPEI).

"Currently, four people have been prevented from being state and private administrators," said Head of the KPK News Section Ali Fikri to reporters at the ACLC building, Rasuna Said, South Jakarta, Tuesday, May 21.

Ali has not detailed the four people. However, from the information circulating they are Muhammad Pradithya who is the Head of the Financing Department of 3 Financing Divisions II at LPEI; Managing Director 4 LPEI Arif Setiawan; President Director of PT Caturkarsa Megatunggal or Komut PT Petro Energy, Jimmy Masrin; and Newin Nugroho who are President Director of PT Petro Energy.

Prevention is carried out for six months. However, investigators can extend it according to their needs.

Ali said that this prevention is expected to facilitate the ongoing investigation process. They are expected to fulfill the summons for questioning.

"We need to remind you to be cooperative," he said.

As for the corruption case involving LPEI, 20 people have been questioned in an investigation effort. This process has been running since mid-March.

The KPK said the report on the alleged corruption at LPEI had been received since May 2023. This was conveyed after the Minister of Finance (Menkeu) Sri Mulyani coordinated a similar case with the Attorney General's Office (AGO).

Previously reported, the KPK said that LPEI had made the state lose up to Rp766,705,455,000 from financing PT PE. It is suspected that corruption occurred when the state-owned company financed it.

This state loss began with the provision of export working capital loans (KMKE) by LPEI. However, the process was carried out less carefully and did not pay attention to the condition of the debtor.