JAKARTA - Head of Sub-Division/Coordinator of Monitoring and Evaluation of Telecommunication Networks, Ministry of Communication and Information (Kemenkominfo), Indra Apriadi was presented as a witness by the Public Prosecutor (JPU) in the alleged corruption case of Base Transceiver Station (BTS) 4G.
In his testimony, Indra admitted that he was urged by the President Director (Director) of the Telecommunications and Information Accessibility Agency (BAKTI) Anang Achmad Latif to submit invalid data related to the points to be built by the 4G BTS tower.
"At that time, those who asked me directly, Mr. Anang, ” said Indra during a trial at the Corruption Court (Tipikor) at the Central Jakarta District Court, Antara, Tuesday, August 1.
Indra conveyed his confession after being questioned by Chief Judge Fahzal Hendri many times. The judge asked whether or not there was a party urging Indra to submit data regarding 7,904 points for the construction of the 4G BTS tower.
Data on 7,904 points to be built by the tower is invalid because based on the findings of the inspectorate, there are 831 locations that have BTS 4G and 301 locations that have been built by the previous BAKTI project.
The data is not yet valid, but it has been submitted to BAKTI. In fact, there are 800 (831 points, ed.) that's already a signal. Prove that it's not valid data,” said judge Fahzal.
In question, the judge then asked Indra the reason for submitting the data that was not yet valid to BAKTI.
“ If the data is not valid, why is it submitted? Why did you rush to convey it? ‘ It's not valid yet, why rush? There is an urgent need for it to be submitted, so that data, for budget proposals? ‘ It could be,” asked judge Fahzal.
"At that time I conveyed, Your Majesty, that the data we had at that time was the third quarter of 2019," Indra replied.
According to judge Fahzal, the answer given by Indra was unsatisfactory, so he repeated his question.
“ It turns out that there are 800 (831 points, ed.) that already have a 4G signal, why else is it built there? ‘ Right, sir, and something has been built by BAKTI before. Yes? ” asked judge Fazal confirmed.
“ Well,” replied Indra.
“It proves it's not valid data. What I ask is, why did you rush to hand over 7,904 points? ” asked the judge.
Answering the judge's question, Indra said that he was asked to give a presentation regarding the data on the number of villages in Indonesia that had received 4G signals. However, judge Fahzal said Indra's answer was not in accordance with the context of the question.
Fahzal assessed that Indra was dodged. He asked Indra to be honest, so Fahzal asked Indra again.
“ 7,904 is used as a basis. That is the basis for submitting the budget, while the data is not yet valid. Does anyone rush to ask this to know how many points will be proposed? Fahzal asked Indra.
Indra again replied that at that time there was a need from the Ministry of Education, Culture, Research, and Technology to explain data related to how many villages in Indonesia had received 4G signals.
“ Do you convey 7,904 invalid data? ” asked judge Fahzal.
" “ I convey that the desktop data is an analysis with consideration, I have conveyed Your Majesty,” Indra replied.
“Has it been conveyed? ” tanya hakim Fahzal memastikan.
"I've told you already. In our presentation there is coverage prediction with the data already submitted, "” said Indra.
Has it been conveyed like that, meaning there is something urgent for you to submit this data quickly? Right? ” asked the judge.
"“ It's because of the process," replied Indra.
Indra still has not answered the context of the question. Therefore, Judge Fahzal again asked the same thing.
“ Who urged you? The invalid data was immediately submitted to BAKTI, who urged you? Fahzal said.
Indra then said that he was asked directly by BAKTI President Director Anang Achmad Latif to submit BTS 4G location data, although the data was not yet valid.
“That's it, how come it's very difficult. The person is in front, really. It's very difficult. It looks like later. You'll get there at the point for a long time, ” said judge Fahzal in response to Indra's answer.
Furthermore, judge Fahzal reminded Indra not to obstruct the examination, as stipulated in Article 21 of the Anti-Corruption Law. The judge asked Indra to provide correct information.
“ Don't let us plunge ourselves into defending others. No, sir. Just save yourself if you're not wrong. Who is right and isn't right will meet at this trial,” said judge Fahzal.
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)
