The case of alleged corruption in Garuda Indonesia was uncovered by the Corruption Eradication Commission (KPK) nearly six years ago. This disclosure is the entry point for investigations into various violations that have occurred for many years within the State-owned airlines. Garuda Indonesia was forced to clean up. Four years after the KPK began its investigation, the Attorney General’s Office (AGO) began a similar investigation but in a different case. So far, five suspects have been announced. The inquisition and prosecution stage for the first batch of suspects/defendants went far from media coverage. Recently, the prosecutors read out demands for three defendants.

In the middle of last week, the Corruption Eradication Commission (KPK) conducted a Sting Operation in East Java and arrested several parties involved in a case of alleged bribery. A day later, the KPK announced a related case and named four suspects, including the deputy speaker of the East Java DPRD, Sahat Tua Simandjuntak (Golkar). East Java has had frequent encounters with the KPK, as if they were reluctant to learn or maybe they really weren’t afraid of the KPK. So, at this point we are not surprised to hear that the KPK is again operating in the province.

The investigation into alleged violations in satellite management cooperation at the Ministry of Defense continues. The case supposedly cost the State around Rp800 billion. Before the case was announced, the last time we reported on the subject matter was in 2018, when the Government was sued by one of its partners on suspicion of default. But something bigger than just a breach of contract is brewing: allegations of corruption. Several months ago, the Attorney General’s Office (AGO) announced that it had named three suspects in the case. By then, the responsible sector is the Solicitor General for Military Crimes. Towards the end of last week, the connectivity investigation team announced a new suspect, an American citizen.

The Attorney General’s Office (AGO) continues the investigation into the case of alleged corruption within PT Waskita Karya Tbk (WSKT). The case especially attracts attention because the investigation was conducted alongside the investigation into the company’s subsidiary, PT Waskita Beton Precast Tbk (WSBP). Earlier this month, the AGO announced that they had named one Waskita Karya executive as a suspect. This week, the AGO announced three new suspects in the case and one suspect on allegation of obstruction of justice.

Of the various provisions outlined in the new Criminal Code (KUHP), there are several articles that have drawn criticism from various parties. However, one of the controversial provisions has escaped public discussion. The provision we mean is regarding the application of living law in society. What exactly is meant by living law? Why is this provision controversial and must be considered carefully?

While the public focuses on criminal arrangements for extramarital relations, the newly passed Criminal Code actually regulates many more important things to pay attention to. Previously, we gave a summary regarding the corruption clause that was changed from the Law on Corruption to the Criminal Code. Apart from that, there is also a clause regarding the living law that must be considered, although unfortunately it did not get public attention. In this article, we will discuss the new provisions regarding corporate responsibility. Previously, this regulation was only made in the form of a Supreme Court Regulation (Perma) and with the elaboration in the Criminal Code, the hierarchy of regulation became even stricter.

Trial of Hasanuddin Ibrahim, former director general of Horticulture in the Ministry of Agriculture, who was allegedly involved in a corruption scheme will end soon. Although the inquisition into this case lasted more than six years, the hearings at the trial only lasted a little longer than two months. This week the prosecutors have read out their demands for Hasanuddin.

Towards the end of last year, PT Gandaerah Hendana (PT GH), a company controlled by CT Samsung (South Korea), was declared guilty by the Rengat District Court. The Court is of the opinion that PT Gandaerah Hendana (PT GH) had failed to anticipate and resolve the fires...

Towards the end of 2021, the National Police’s Criminal Investigation Unit (Bareskrim POLRI) announced that they were investigating allegations of corruption at PT Jakarta Infrastruktur Propertindo (PT JIP), a subsidiary of PT Jakarta Propertindo (Jakpro)—a company owned by city administration of Jakarta. The POLRI also announced that it had named two suspects in the case and had prevented them from traveling abroad. POLRI announced recently that they had developed the investigation and named the two suspects as suspects in the case of alleged money laundering. With the announcement, the suspects are finally detained.

In addition to lawsuit filed by Trijono Gondokusumo and Andri Tedjadharma (linked to Bank Centris Internasional), the actions taken by the Satgas BLBI (Satuan Tugas Penanganan Hak Tagih Negara Dana Bantuan Likuiditas Bank Indonesia) was also challenged by a third party, namely PT Beruangmas Perkasa (or PT Beruang Mas Perkasa – PT BMP) with link to Bank Mayora. How can the actions of the Satgas affect the company and what is the relationship between the company and BLBI?