Expert: Administrative Error in Febrie Case Does Not Invalidate Suspect Status

A criminal law professor at Gadjah Mada University, Marcus Priyo Gunarto, has said that errors in administrative documents do not invalidate the suspect status of former Deputy Attorney General for Special Crimes, Febrie Adriansyah.

The opinion was delivered by Marcus when he was presented as an expert in the continuation of the pre-trial hearing at the South Jakarta District Court on Friday (21/8).

“Indeed, in the investigation process there are many administrative acts. Errors in the preparation of administrative documents do not then invalidate the entire investigation process,” he explained.

According to him, the process of determining a suspect is carried out through a procedure of collecting evidence. He explained that if there is an administrative error, it can still be corrected without affecting the substance of the case and the investigation process.

“An investigation collects evidence, clarifies the criminal act that occurred and determines the suspect; that is the principle. So it does not cancel it; what is corrected is only the administrative error,” he said.

On the other hand, Marcus explained that under the new Criminal Procedure Code (KUHAP), there is no obligation for law enforcement officials to examine a prospective suspect.

He said that Article 90 of Law Number 20 of 2025 concerning the KUHAP explains that the designation of a suspect is sufficiently based on two pieces of evidence.

Marcus said that interpretation is then reinforced by the formulation of Article 92 of the KUHAP. In that article, he said, it is explained that if a suspect has not been found, investigators may request assistance from the public, the media, and other parties to locate them.

“Because there it says they can request assistance from the public, from the media, regarding the whereabouts of the suspect. The ‘S’ in Suspect there is written with a capital letter. The meaning is that the suspect is the authentic interpretation contained in Article 1, the definition of a suspect,” he explained.

Therefore, Marcus said that in determining a suspect, it is not necessary for the person to have been physically examined first. Because in Article 92 of the Criminal Code, the figure of the Suspect can still be sought by requesting assistance from the public or the media.

Meanwhile, in Article 184 of the KUHAP, Marcus explained that it is possible for law enforcement officials to designate a suspect without an examination as a prospective suspect due to their absence, or in absentia.

Previously, former Deputy Attorney General for Special Crimes, Febrie Adriansyah, asked the sole judge of the South Jakarta District Court to annul the determination of his suspect status and the search of his house in Sentul.

This was conveyed by Febrie in the petition of the pre-trial lawsuit filed with the South Jakarta District Court. Febrie also asked the judge to declare invalid all legal actions, including the issuance of investigation warrants, seizures, and travel bans.

The Attorney General’s Office has named former Deputy Attorney General for Special Crimes, Febrie Adriansyah, as a suspect in money laundering related to the discovery of 74 kilograms of gold and Rp543 billion in cash at his house in Sentul.

Most recently, the Attorney General’s Office also named private parties Nurman Herin (NH) and lawyer Don Ritto (DR) as suspects for their involvement in the money laundering case together with Febrie.

The Chairman of Team 9 and Deputy Attorney General for Supervision, Rudi Margono, said the alleged money laundering was carried out by Febrie as a prosecutor or structural official during his service at the Attorney General’s Office.