Defendant in LNG Case Debates Profits with Ahok in Courtroom
The prosecution presented former Pertamina Chief Commissioner Basuki Tjahaja Purnama (Ahok) as a witness in a corruption case involving the procurement of liquefied natural gas (LNG). Ahok engaged in a debate with defendant Hari Karyuliarto regarding whether Pertamina profited from LNG purchases in the courtroom at the Jakarta Corruption Court, Central Jakarta, on Monday, 2 March 2026.
Initially, Hari, the former Director of Gas at PT Pertamina, questioned Ahok as to whether he knew Pertamina had benefited from purchasing LNG from Corpus Christi Liquefaction LLC.
“Do you know that Corpus Christi, Woodside, all of them profited?” Hari asked.
“Yes. That is what I meant…,” Ahok replied before being interrupted by Hari.
“You know?” Hari pressed.
“Yes. Because the world’s LNG simply happened to rise,” Ahok answered.
Hari then asked whether the benefits of LNG were discussed at every meeting. Hari questioned why Ahok, as Pertamina’s Chief Commissioner at the time, did not express gratitude when LNG generated profits.
“It is not the case that this became profitable. So please do not misunderstand. The issue is…,” Ahok said before being interrupted again.
“No. My question is, did you know it was profitable?” Hari pressed.
“Yes. If there is profit, there is loss, we know. How could we not know,” Ahok replied.
The debate was halted by the judge, who instructed Ahok to simply answer Hari’s questions.
Hari subsequently questioned why Ahok consistently avoided acknowledging the profits the company obtained from LNG business. Ahok denied he was evading the issue.
“Why do you always avoid mentioning profit?” Hari asked.
“I am not evading,” Ahok responded.
“From the beginning and in statements outside the KPK after investigation, you never said profit,” Hari said.
“No, I am not evading. The point I am making is that from the outset when I took over in 2020, we were reported to face losses ahead,” Ahok replied.
Ahok stated that Pertamina achieved profitability during his tenure as Chief Commissioner. He noted that Pertamina’s profits came not solely from LNG.
“Indeed, Pertamina under my time turned from losses to profit, Sir. The largest in Pertamina’s history. But not only from LNG, Sir. But from cost optimisation led by…,” Ahok said before being interrupted.
“I am not asking about Pertamina’s performance. I am asking about the performance of LNG contracts,” Hari said.
“Yes, that is what I said. I never went into detail,” Ahok replied.
“Let me ask you once more, Mr Ahok. In the MSRKAP (Monitoring of Corporate Work Plan and Budget Targets), did you acknowledge or realise that LNG was already profitable in 2022, 23, 24?” Hari asked.
“We did not pay close attention. What is certain is that there were reports, there were sales reports lower than the market price by PT TES, that is what we reported as well,” Ahok answered.
“Just acknowledge it, Sir, that it was profitable, Sir. No need to be shy,” Hari said.
“Indeed it was profitable. I already said so,” Ahok replied.
Earlier, prosecutors at the KPK charged former Director of Gas at PT Pertamina Hari Karyuliarto and former Vice President of Strategic Planning Business Development in Pertamina’s Gas Directorate Yenni Andayani with involvement in corruption relating to LNG procurement that harmed the state by USD 113 million. Both are accused of acting jointly with former Pertamina Director General Galaila Karen Kardinah (also known as Karen Agustiawan), who was previously convicted in this case.
“The act of enriching oneself or another or a corporation, namely enriching Galaila Karen Kardinah alias Karen Agustiawan in the amount of Rp 1,091,280,281 (Rp 1 billion) and USD 104,016 and enriching Corpus Christi Liquefaction LLC in the amount of USD 113,839,186 (USD 113 million),” the prosecution stated.
The prosecution said the loss figure was based on a report from an investigative examination by the Indonesian State Audit Board (BPK RI). Prosecutors said the gas purchase was made on the grounds that domestic gas stocks were limited, necessitating Pertamina to purchase gas from the United States.
The prosecution said the approval for LNG procurement was issued by Karen without guidelines for LNG procurement implementation. The LNG procurement, according to prosecutors, was conducted based on best practices that Pertamina always followed as a state’s LNG seller.
After various negotiation processes and internal discussions, Pertamina proceeded with the gas purchase from Corpus Christi Liquefaction LLC. However, prosecutors stated that Pertamina did not yet have a committed domestic buyer for LNG from the US company.
The prosecution said the LNG purchase was not accompanied by final economic analysis or calculation. This condition resulted in excess or oversupply of LNG.
“Yet according to the interim risk assessment regarding the volume of imported LNG 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 per cent according to the statistical probability approach or 90 per cent according to the conservative approach or 80 per cent of LNG SPA volume according to the aggressive approach so as not to cause losses to PT Pertamina,” the prosecutor stated.
The prosecution said Pertamina then sold the surplus imported LNG to overseas buyers during 2019-2023. Prosecutors stated that the total cost of purchasing 18 cargos of LNG from Corpus Christi Liquefaction incurred by Pertamina amounted to USD 341,410,404, and Pertamina sold them at a loss with a sales value of USD 248,784,764.
The prosecution said Pertamina incurred losses from this sales and purchase practice worth USD 92,625,640. The prosecution also stated that there were uncommitted cargos, forcing Pertamina to pay suspension fees of USD 10,045,980.
The prosecution contended that the defendants’ actions caused a loss to the state of USD 113,839,186. This amount is equivalent to Rp 1.9 trillion based on current exchange rates.