Defendant's Legal Team Appeals 6-Year Corruption Sentence in Jambi Court Case

Rifaldy and others admit to using the names of several academic institutions. Rifaldy and others admit to using the names of several academic institutions. Bengawan Kamto’s legal team has filed an appeal against the six-year prison sentence imposed by the Jambi Corruption Court panel in a case concerning investment credit and working capital for PT Prosympac Agro Lestari (PT PAL). In a statement, Bengawan Kamto’s lawyer Ilham Kurniawan Dartias highlighted the ruling requiring a compensation payment of Rp80.1 billion, which he argued should be resolved through commercial civil law mechanisms. He stated that the value of the credit collateral exceeds the compensation amount imposed on his client. According to the Public Valuation Office (KJPP) assessment, the collateral value of PT PAL’s palm oil mill (PKS) in the first auction process initiated by BNI through the State Assets Auction Unit (KPKNL) reached approximately Rp126 billion. “The asset value significantly exceeds the compensation liability imposed on BK,” Ilham stated on Monday (1/6). During the Jambi Corruption Court trial, business law expert from Gadjah Mada University, Professor Nindyo Pramono, stated that loan defaults and Debt Payment Deferral (PKPU) processes leading to court-approved restructuring in the Commercial Court are business risks and cannot automatically be classified as corruption. He explained that loan defaults are inherent business risks and that losses incurred by state-owned enterprises (BUMN) do not automatically constitute state losses under corruption law. Furthermore, alleged imperfections in credit issuance SOPs, despite all steps being followed and using a four-eyes assessment system, should be treated as internal corporate administrative issues. The legal team also highlighted PT MMJ (Mayang Mangurai Jambi)’s control of PT PAL’s palm oil mill for approximately three years and six months without official permission and without remitting production proceeds to BNI or the state. The issue has drawn attention from legal experts and social organisation DNIKS (National Council for Social Welfare), raising questions about asset monitoring and security mechanisms for credit collateral. According to the legal team, PT PAL’s mill operated from November 2022 until the Jambi High Prosecutor’s Office seized it in June 2025, and until facts emerged in April 2026 court proceedings, with no clarity on accountability for production proceeds during this period until its second seizure. This has raised questions over why no stronger legal action was taken against those managing the assets, including alleged failure to meet payment obligations to BNI and the state for years. The legal team also argued the court failed to consider that Bengawan Kamto injected around Rp61 billion through his company, PT JIM, to support PT PAL’s operations and credit payments from 2018 to 2021. Additionally, Bengawan Kamto provided additional guarantees, including personal assets (three residential apartments), personal and corporate guarantees, and cross-collateral, as risk mitigation and proof of good faith in business operations. “Our client was not an original founder of PT PAL. He attempted to save the company by providing significant financial support and meeting all bank requirements,” the legal team stated. The legal team highlighted a dissenting opinion from Presiding Judge Annisa Brigestriana, which fundamentally differed from the two other judges. In the dissenting opinion, it was stated that Bengawan Kamto lacked mens rea or malicious intent. The ruling cited his Rp61 billion investment in PT PAL’s operations and debt repayments, along with additional guarantees required by the bank beyond the primary collateral—factory, land, and machinery valued at over Rp126 billion. Based on this, the dissenting opinion concluded that Bengawan Kamto’s actions did not meet corruption crime elements and he should be acquitted. The legal team stated the sharp disagreement among judges indicates serious legal debate over whether the case is corruption or a commercial civil dispute. They also questioned the sentencing disparity between Bengawan Kamto and Arif Rohman. They cited digital forensic evidence from WhatsApp groups showing Arif Rohman’s involvement in PT PAL’s management and credit processes without Bengawan Kamto’s knowledge, and Rp5 billion taken from Bengawan Kamto without his consent. Yet, Arif Rohman received a lighter two-year sentence. Conversely, Bengawan Kamto, who reportedly surrendered personal and corporate assets as collateral, received a harsher sentence. The legal team also highlighted the existence of the Medan Commercial Court Homologation Decision No. 39/Pdt.Sus-PKPU/2021/PN Mdn, valid until June 2027. They argued the homologation decision indicates PT PAL’s debt restructuring falls under civil bankruptcy law, and should have been considered in the court’s ruling.