AGO: Febrie Exploited Position to Receive Money and Gold Bars
The Attorney General’s Office (AGO) has stated that former Junior Attorney General for Special Crimes (Jampidsus) Febrie Adriansyah exploited his position to unlawfully receive money and gold bars allegedly connected to the proceeds of crime.
This was conveyed by the AGO’s legal team, acting as the respondent in a pretrial hearing at the South Jakarta District Court, on Thursday (20/8).
The AGO’s legal team argued that there was an error in Febrie’s pretrial petition in understanding the legal construction of the suspect designation. In his petition, Febrie treated the term ‘trading in influence’ as a separate criminal offence used as the sole basis for naming him a suspect.
‘In fact, this is not the case. The trading in influence mentioned in the suspect designation is not a standalone criminal act, nor is it the criminal article charged against the petitioner,’ the team stated.
‘The use of the term is intended to describe the manner, pattern, character and modus operandi allegedly used by the petitioner in carrying out the acts under investigation,’ a representative of the AGO’s legal team added.
The AGO’s legal team explained that the term ‘trading in influence’ was used to describe the modus operandi of the criminal acts allegedly committed by Febrie.
Febrie is alleged to have exploited his position to unlawfully obtain money and gold bars allegedly connected to the proceeds of crime.
‘This can be seen clearly and explicitly from the description in the suspect designation, which states that the petitioner is alleged to have exploited his position, authority or influence — in brackets, trading in influence — to obtain or receive unlawfully facilities, benefits, money, gold bars or other economically valuable objects allegedly connected to the proceeds of crime,’ the team stated.
The AGO said the term ‘trading in influence’ was not positioned as a standalone criminal norm but rather as an explanation of how the influence of office or authority was allegedly used to obtain benefits. The AGO requested that this argument be set aside and rejected.
‘Therefore, the petitioner’s application, in the part arguing that trading in influence is not a criminal act, has misidentified the object, misunderstood the construction of the suspect designation, and has asked the pretrial judge to enter into an examination of the merits of the case. This argument therefore deserves to be set aside and/or at the very least declared inadmissible,’ the team stated.
Previously, Febrie asked the sole judge of the South Jakarta District Court to annul the detention carried out by the Attorney General’s Office (AGO).
This was conveyed by Febrie in the petition of the pretrial motion filed with the South Jakarta District Court. Febrie also asked the judge to declare the detention order invalid and without binding legal force.
In his petition, Febrie challenged Detention Order Number PRIN-43/F/Fd.2/07/2026 dated 24 July 2026 issued against him. His legal counsel asked the judge to declare the order invalid along with all its legal consequences.