CMNP Wins Over Rp 500 Billion from Hary Tanoe, Funds to Be Used for This
Jakarta, CNBC Indonesia — Conglomerate Jusuf Hamka has expressed satisfaction with the legal process and the court’s decision declaring that Hary Tanoesoedibjo and PT MNC Asia Holding Tbk (BHIT) committed an unlawful act against PT Citra Marga Nusaphala Persada Tbk (CMNP).
The decision is recorded in Civil Case Number 142/Pdt.G/2025/PN Jkt.Pst., which partially granted CMNP’s claim.
In an official statement, Hary Tanoe and MNC Asia Holding are required to pay material damages of US$28 million or Rp 484 billion (at an exchange rate of Rp 17,300) plus 6% annual interest from 9 May 2002 until fully paid.
Jusuf Hamka revealed that this interest rate is far lower than it should be if based on Bank Indonesia Circular No. 1999.
“It should be 27% per year according to the 1999 Bank Indonesia Circular,” he said when contacted by CNBC Indonesia on Thursday (23/4/2026).
Jusuf Hamka explained that the interest amount is the decision of the Panel of Judges, deemed reasonable. His side will consider further legal action.
“The lawyers may take further legal steps,” he stated.
It is known that, in addition to the damages plus interest, the Panel of Judges also ordered Hary Tanoe and MNC Asia Holding to pay immaterial damages of Rp 50 billion jointly and severally, as well as court costs of Rp 5.02 million.
Jusuf Hamka revealed that the funds will be used not only to pay the rights of employees and parties harmed by the case but also channelled for charity or utilised for the broader community in need.
Previously, the Spokesperson for the North Jakarta District Court, Sunoto, stated that the Panel of Judges essentially opined that the transaction on 12 May 1999 was substantively an exchange of securities agreement as meant in Article 1541 of the Indonesian Civil Code, not a sale-purchase.
The Panel of Judges assessed that Hary Tanoe and MNC, as the initiating, offering, and delivering party of the Negotiable Certificate of Deposit (NCD) to CMNP, should have known that the NCD did not meet the requirements of Bank Indonesia Circular No. 21/27/UPG dated 27 October 1988, as reinforced in the Supreme Court’s Review Decision No. 376 PK/Pdt/2008 dated 19 December 2008, which has final and binding legal force.
The Panel of Judges applied the piercing the corporate veil doctrine (a legal doctrine that penetrates or lifts the corporate veil, so that legal liability which should be limited to the company shifts to the personal assets of shareholders, directors, or commissioners) as meant in Article 3 paragraph (2) of Law No. 40 of 2007 on Limited Liability Companies to the defendants, considering that the disputed actions were not merely company management acts but reflected bad faith exploiting the corporate name.
Additionally, the Panel of Judges explained the rejection of the compound interest claim of 2% per month as deemed disproportionate, and set a reasonable interest of 6% per year as compensation for the time value of money.
Claims for coercive money (dwangsom) and provisional execution (uitvoerbaar bij voorraad) were rejected in accordance with Supreme Court Jurisprudence No. 791 K/Sip/1972 and Supreme Court Circular No. 3 of 2000.
It should be noted that this is a first-instance decision. Parties dissatisfied with this decision have the right to appeal to the DKI Jakarta High Court within 14 days from the lawful notification of the decision, in accordance with applicable civil procedure rules.