Tin Corruption Trial, Expert Says State Losses Can Only Be Examined by Indonesian Audit Board

The trial of the alleged tin corruption case at the Jakarta Corruption Court, Monday (11/25/2024). (ANTARA/Agatha Olivia Victoria)

JAKARTA - Legal expert from Padjadjaran University, Romli Atmasasmita, revealed the difference between state losses and financial losses in cases of alleged corruption.

This was conveyed when he was an expert in mitigation at the trial of the alleged corruption case of tin commodity trading in the mining business permit area of ​​PT Timah Tbkn on Monday, November 25.

According to him, the calculation of state losses is only carried out by the Audit Board of Indonesia (BPK). This is in accordance with the mandate of the 1945 Constitution.

“State financial losses and state losses are different. State financial losses are definitely related to the State Budget (APBN) or Regional Budget (APBD), according to the definition in the Law. Meanwhile, state losses can come from other aspects, such as environmental damage," Romli said in a trial quoted on Tuesday, November 26.

However, measuring the value of environmental losses is not the authority of the BPK or Financial and Development Supervisory Agency (BPKP). But rather environmental experts.

Therefore, the panel of judges is considered to have to consider the validity of the basis in calculating state and financial losses

"If the losses are only based on estimates, they cannot be used as a basis by judges in deciding corruption cases," he said

In addition, Romli also considered that the BPKP also did not have the authority to calculate state losses. This is because its duties are limited to being a supervisor.

"BPKP has no legal basis for calculating state losses. Its role is only as a supervisor and internal auditor for ministries/government institutions. The basis is only the Presidential Regulation. To calculate official state losses, that is the BPK's job," he added.

According to him, the report used in the PT Timah case seemed forced, especially since this case targeted the private sector which is in fact only a working partner of the BUMN subsidiary.

“My language is forced. The unlawful act (PMH) that is the basis is not clearly visible. If at the board of directors (PT Timah) there is a violation of authority, that still makes sense. But if it is to the private sector, it is not necessarily, because they have protection in the contract agreement," said Romli.