[REVISION HISTORY]

Indonesia: Febrie Adriansyah pretrial motion rejected

Updated 30 times since CLSTR started tracking revisions of this situation.

What changed

2026-09-05 12:12 UTC → 2026-09-08 01:52 UTC · added ~~removed~~

Indonesia’s anti-corruption task force has broadened the money-laundering (TPPU) investigation centred on former special-crime judge Febrie Adriansyah. The primary suspect list includes Adriansyah, Don Ritto, and businessman Nurman Herin, linked to alleged corruption in Pertamina Energy Trading Ltd (Petral) between 2008 and 2015. In August 2026, Adriansyah’s legal team filed a pretrial motion at the South Jakarta District Court to challenge his suspect status, his detention, and the legality of searches at his Sentul residence. On 27 August 2026, Judge Richard Edwin Basoeki rejected the pretrial motion, upholding the legality of the investigations, searches, and seizures. The court cited allegations that Adriansyah received approximately Rp 40 billion from businessman Tan Kian, linked to the ASABRI and Jiwasraya cases. On 3 September 2026, ~~Adriansyah, who is detained at the KPK detention center,~~ Adriansyah underwent a 10-hour examination by the Attorney General’s Office (AGO) as a suspect. ~~Investigators reportedly posed approximately 50 questions during~~ Following this, the ~~session. Businessman Nurman Herin was~~ AGO denied allegations that four of its officials received Rp 40 billion from Tan Kian, labeling the claims as “mere assumptions.” Anang Supriatna, Head of the Legal Information Center at Kejagung, stated there is no concrete evidence to support these claims. Adriansyah’s counsel, Febri Diansyah, also ~~questioned during this period, though in~~ denied the ~~capacity~~ receipt of ~~a witness. The investigation has drawn scrutiny from legal experts regarding institutional integrity~~ funds, arguing that Tan Kian’s interrogation records used speculative language, stating it “could be” that money was intended for officials, and ~~procedural rights.~~ noted uncertainty regarding the final destination of the funds. Legal experts continue to scrutinize the case. Criminal law expert Azmi Syahputra noted that prosecuting its own officials tests the AGO’s commitment to transparency. Conversely, Professor Jamin Ginting raised concerns regarding procedural integrity, suggesting that failing to examine an individual as a witness before elevating them to suspect status may violate procedural ~~rights and hinder legal defense preparation.~~ rights.

Versions

Only revisions since CLSTR began indexing content versions appear here. Select a version to see what changed compared to the one before it.