CNMP Share Movement After Jusuf Hamka Wins Lawsuit Against Hary Tanoe

Jakarta, CNBC Indonesia - Shares in PT Citra Marga Nusaphala Persada Tbk (CMNP) showed significant strengthening throughout trading on 24 April 2026 after the toll road company owned by businessman Jusuf Hamka won a lawsuit at the Jakarta Central District Court.

During today’s trading, CMNP shares briefly hit the upper auto rejection limit (ARA), rising 24.56% to Rp2,130 per share. However, the gains were trimmed, still booking a significant increase of 17%.

Yesterday, CMNP share prices were in positive territory, rising to Rp1,710 per share at the close of trading, strengthening 5.23%. Over the past week, CMNP shares have risen 36%.

In terms of valuation, CMNP has a market capitalisation of Rp12.72 trillion with a price-to-earnings (P/E) ratio of 12.26.

The strengthening of CMNP shares aligns with the Jakarta Central District Court’s decision that Hary Tanoesoedibjo and PT MNC Asia Holding Tbk committed an unlawful act against PT Citra Marga Nusaphala Persada Tbk (CMNP), owned by toll road businessman Jusuf Hamka.

The panel of judges in Civil Case Number 142/Pdt.G/2025/PN Jkt.Pst partially granted CMNP’s lawsuit.

Spokesperson for the Jakarta Central District Court Sunoto stated in an official statement that Hary Tanoe and MNC Asia Holding must pay material damages of US$28 million or Rp484 billion (exchange rate Rp17,300) plus 6% interest per year from 9 May 2002 until fully paid.

The panel of judges also ordered Hary Tanoe and MNC Asia Holding to pay immaterial damages of Rp50 billion jointly and severally, as well as court costs of Rp5.02 million.

“The panel of judges essentially opined that the transaction on 12 May 1999 was substantively an exchange of securities as meant by Article 1541 of the Indonesian Civil Code, not a sale and purchase,” Sunoto wrote in the official statement, quoted on Friday (24/4/2026).

The panel of judges assessed that Hary Tanoe and MNC, as the parties who initiated, offered, and delivered the Negotiable Certificate of Deposit (NCD) to CMNP, should have known that the NCD did not meet the requirements of Bank Indonesia Circular Number 21/27/UPG dated 27 October 1988, as reinforced in the Supreme Court Reconsideration Decision Number 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 pierces or lifts the corporate veil, so that legal liability that should be limited to the company shifts to the personal assets of shareholders, directors, or commissioners) as meant by Article 3 paragraph (2) of Law Number 40 of 2007 on Limited Liability Companies to the defendants, considering that the act in question was not merely a corporate management action, but reflected bad faith exploiting the corporate name.

In addition, the panel of judges explained that they rejected the claim for compound interest of 2% per month as deemed disproportionate, and set a reasonable interest rate of 6% per year as compensation for the time value of money.

Claims for coercive payment (dwangsom) and immediate enforceability (uitvoerbaar bij voorraad) were rejected in accordance with Supreme Court Jurisprudence Number 791 K/Sip/1972 and Supreme Court Circular Number 3 of 2000.

“This is a first-instance decision. Parties dissatisfied with this decision have the right to file an appeal to the DKI Jakarta High Court within 14 (fourteen) days from the lawful notification of the decision, in accordance with the applicable civil procedure law,” said