Ahok Reveals LNG Import Management but No Buyer Commitment Contracts in Place

The Prosecutor’s Office presented former Pertamina Chief Commissioner Basuki Tjahaja Purnama (Ahok) as a witness in a corruption trial concerning the procurement of liquefied natural gas (LNG). Ahok reported that during his first meeting with the board of directors, he received information about anticipated losses from LNG purchases.

The hearing took place at the Corruption Court in Jakarta on Monday, 2 March 2026. Ahok stated that during a board meeting, he discovered plans for LNG imports, yet the directors did not possess buyer commitment contracts.

“What I remember, Prosecutor, when I first entered in January, there was a routine BOD-BOC meeting. At that meeting it was conveyed that there would be losses from LNG sales,” Ahok said.

“Losses? Who conveyed this?,” the prosecutor asked.

“The directors. That is what I remember. Then when we first entered, we were surprised why there could be losses. Then there was debate at that meeting. There were purchase contracts, but there were no committed buyer contracts,” Ahok replied.

Ahok explained that when importing LNG, there should ordinarily already be commitment contracts with buyers. He stated that at that time in 2020, losses of USD 100 million were discovered with potential losses reaching USD 300 million.

“What we heard at that time, which I also conveyed in the investigation report, is that usually for LNG purchases, there is already buyer commitment,” Ahok clarified.

“So there is an end-user?,” the prosecutor asked.

“Yes, there is. If I am not mistaken, at that time PLN did not sign off on the price. Shipment had to proceed, if I am not mistaken perhaps the price would later be noted for you. So there was a loss of over USD 100 million. Then projected for 2020, there was cargo that also had no buyers yet. If that happened, the loss might be USD 300 million,” Ahok replied.

“Dollars?,” the prosecutor asked.

Ahok explained that he and the board of commissioners requested an audit. The findings revealed that for the LNG import activities, the directors should have requested approval from the board of commissioners and the Ministry of State-Owned Enterprises.

“Data emerged from the examination by the internal audit function, wherein it was conveyed that the LNG purchase was material in nature. In the articles of association, material means the value of expenditure that will have an impact on the company. That is then considered material, and typically in a company, if considered material, it should request approval from the board of commissioners. Or even higher up, I forget the amount, it must be reported and submitted to a General Meeting of Shareholders to the Minister of State-Owned Enterprises,” Ahok said.

“At that time was there any submission in that regard?,” the prosecutor asked.

“We found none at all,” Ahok replied.

Charges

Previously, the Public Prosecutor at the Corruption Eradication Commission (KPK) indicted two new defendants in the LNG procurement corruption case, causing state losses of USD 113 million. The two defendants are former Pertamina Gas Director Hari Karyuliarto and former VP Strategic Planning Business Development of Pertamina’s Gas Directorate Yenni Andayani.

The indictment hearing took place at the Corruption Court in Central Jakarta on Tuesday, 23 December 2025. Both are accused of committing acts together with former Pertamina Chief Executive Galaila Karen Kardinah, also known as Karen Agustiawan, who was previously convicted in this case.

“Committing acts to enrich themselves or others or a corporation, specifically enriching Galaila Karen Kardinah alias Karen Agustiawan by Rp 1,091,280,281 (approximately Rp 1 billion) and USD 104,016, and enriching the corporation Corpus Christi Liquefaction LLC by USD 113,839,186 (USD 113 million),” the prosecutor stated.

The prosecutor said the loss figure was based on an investigative examination report by the Supreme Audit Agency (BPK). The prosecutor said the gas purchase was conducted on the grounds that domestic gas stocks were limited, necessitating Pertamina to purchase gas from the United States.

The prosecutor stated that the principle approval for LNG procurement was issued by Karen without implementation guidelines for LNG procurement. The LNG procurement, according to the prosecutor, was conducted based on best practices consistently followed by Pertamina as a state-owned LNG seller.

Following various negotiation processes and internal discussion procedures, Pertamina purchased gas from Corpus Christi Liquefaction LLC. However, the prosecutor stated, Pertamina did not have a permanent buyer for LNG in the domestic market who would absorb or purchase LNG from the US company.

The prosecutor stated that the LNG purchase was not accompanied by economic analysis or final calculations. This situation resulted in LNG oversupply.

“Whereas according to the interim risk assessment concerning the volume of LNG imports to be purchased by Pertamina’s Gas Directorate, there should have been a gas sales agreement (GSA) before the LNG sales and purchase agreement (SPA) was signed so that the LNG could be absorbed at 95 percent according to a statistical probability approach or 90 percent according to a conservative approach or 80 percent of the LNG SPA volume according to an aggressive approach, so as not to cause losses to PT Pertamina,” the prosecutor said.

The prosecutor stated that Pertamina subsequently sold the surplus imported LNG to overseas buyers between 2019 and 2023. The prosecutor said the total cost of purchasing 18 cargoes of LNG from Corpus Christi Liquefaction incurred by Pertamina totalled USD 341,410,404, and Pertamina sold it at a loss with a sales value of USD 248,784,764.

The prosecutor stated Pertamina suffered losses from this trading practice valued at USD 92,625,640. The prosecutor also stated there were uncommitted cargoes, requiring Pertamina to pay suspension fees of USD 10,045,980.

The prosecutor stated the actions of the defendants have caused state losses of USD 113,839,186. This amount is equivalent to Rp 1.9 trillion based on current exchange rates.

“Causing harm to state finances at PT Pertamina (Persero) of USD 113,839,186,” the prosecutor said.