President Prabowo Subianto has officially granted rehabilitation to three former directors of PT Angkutan Sungai, Danau, dan Penyeberangan Indonesia Ferry (ASDP). Ira Puspadewi, Muhammad Yusuf Hadi, and Harry Muhammad Adhi Caksono had previously been sentenced to 4 to 4.5 years in prison by the Corruption Criminal Court (Tipikor), a verdict that sparked considerable debate.
The judicial panel had ruled that the trio caused state losses amounting to a staggering IDR 1.25 trillion through the corporate acquisition of PT Jembatan Nusantara. However, a significant point of contention arose during the trial process: no evidence was found indicating that the three directors received any flow of funds or personal facilities from the transaction, challenging the conventional narrative of corruption for personal gain.
Adding further complexity to the case, the verdict issued on November 20 included a notable dissenting opinion from the Chairman of the Panel of Judges, Sunoto. He emphatically stated that no indication of malicious intent (mens rea) was discovered in the entire acquisition process, suggesting that the directors’ actions, while perhaps flawed, were not driven by criminal intent.
Judge Sunoto further argued that the calculation of state losses should ideally be conducted by independent auditing bodies such as the Supreme Audit Agency (BPK) or the Financial and Development Supervisory Agency (BPKP). He highlighted that BPK, in its assessment, did not conclude that corrupt practices had occurred and did not recommend criminal charges; instead, it merely advised administrative improvements, underscoring the distinction between administrative shortcomings and criminal misconduct.
Furthermore, Sunoto contended that the directors should have been protected under the Business Judgment Rule (BJR). This crucial legal principle is enshrined in Law No. 40 of 2007 concerning Limited Liability Companies and Government Regulation No. 23 of 2022 regarding State-Owned Enterprises (BUMN). These regulations provide a safeguard for corporate leaders, ensuring they cannot be criminalized for losses incurred, provided they acted in good faith, with due prudence for the company’s interests, without personal vested interests, took steps to prevent further losses, and the losses were not a result of their negligence.
The court’s decision to convict the three ASDP directors has regrettably extended the list of BUMN directors entangled in corruption cases due to perceived errors in decision-making. This trend is particularly concerning given that many of these decisions, including the one involving ASDP, were made without malicious intent or the presence of bribery, raising questions about the legal interpretation of corporate governance within state-owned entities.
Among the prominent BUMN directors who have faced legal challenges stemming from their corporate decisions are Hotasi Nababan, former CEO of Merpati; Karen Agustiawan, former CEO of Pertamina; RJ Lino, former CEO of Pelindo II; and Milawarma, former CEO of Bukit Asam, illustrating a broader systemic issue affecting the leadership of Indonesia’s state-owned enterprises.
Summary
President Prabowo Subianto has officially granted rehabilitation to three former directors of PT Angkutan Sungai, Danau, dan Penyeberangan Indonesia Ferry (ASDP): Ira Puspadewi, Muhammad Yusuf Hadi, and Harry Muhammad Adhi Caksono. They had previously been sentenced to 4 to 4.5 years in prison by the Corruption Criminal Court (Tipikor) for allegedly causing IDR 1.25 trillion in state losses through a corporate acquisition. A significant point of contention during the trial was the absence of evidence indicating that the directors received any personal financial gain or facilities from the transaction.
The Chairman of the Panel of Judges, Sunoto, issued a dissenting opinion, stating no malicious intent (mens rea) was found and arguing that state loss calculations should be performed by independent auditing bodies like BPK, which only recommended administrative improvements, not criminal charges. Sunoto also contended that the directors should have been protected under the Business Judgment Rule (BJR), a legal principle safeguarding corporate leaders acting in good faith from criminalization for business losses. This case highlights a concerning trend of BUMN directors facing corruption charges for perceived errors in decision-making, often without malicious intent or bribery.
