JAKARTA - The fact of the trial of the import bribery case in the Directorate General of Customs and Excise (DJBC) which revealed the flow of Rp. 21 billion to the Director General of Customs and Excise Djaka Budhi is considered to leave questions. The public should not rush to conclude that there is a receipt of money only with the code BC1.
This was conveyed by the specialist in counter-intelligence analysis, R. Gautama Wiranegara who assessed that the receipt of the money had not been fully revealed at the trial.
"It is precisely there that the legal question lies. If the final recipient of code 1 is unknown, while the code 1 envelope is said to be in Rizal, then there are still links that must be proven," said Gautama in his statement, Thursday, June 18.
The owner of Blueray Cargo, John Field, confirmed the existence of the BC1, BC2, and BC3 codes in the company's payment records during the trial at the Tipikor Court on June 12.
In the construction read by the prosecutor, BC1 was associated with the Director General of Customs and Excise with a value of Rp3 billion per month for seven months or a total of Rp21 billion.
However, according to Gautama, this statement cannot be separated from the fact of the previous trial on May 20, 2026. At that time, Orlando Hamonangan was said to have admitted that he did not know who the final recipient of the envelope with the code 1 was.
Therefore, he assessed that there were still chains of evidence that had to be opened to determine whether the money had actually been received by the party associated with the BC1 code.
"This is important. Testimony based on confidence in intermediaries still has evidentiary value, but it does not close the need for other evidence that shows who the final recipient is," he said.
Gautama said the focus of the proof should not stop at the existence of the payment code and the nominal amount of money mentioned in the trial. Investigators and public prosecutors also need to prove whether the money was actually forwarded and received by the intended party.
According to him, a number of fundamental questions still have to be answered. Starting from whether the envelope with code 1 is forwarded to another party, who witnessed the final delivery, to whether there is communication or a flow of funds that confirms the receipt.
"If these questions have not been answered, then the public needs to understand that the process of proof is still ongoing. The code is not automatically the same as acceptance," said Gautama.
"What must be sought is not who is mentioned the most, but who actually accepts, knows, approves, and enjoys the benefits of the gift," he concluded.
The English, Chinese, Japanese, Arabic, and French versions are automatically generated by the AI. So there may still be inaccuracies in translating, please always see Indonesian as our main language. (system supported by DigitalSiber.id)
