Febrie allegedly received Rp40 billion related to ASABRI and Jiwasraya corruption
Former Junior Attorney General for Special Crimes (Jampidsus) Febrie Adriansyah is alleged to have received Rp40 billion from businessman Tan Kian in connection with the ASABRI and Jiwasraya corruption cases.
“Considering that one of the statements referred to as part of the construction of evidence is Tan Kian’s statement regarding the handover of money in Singapore dollars with an equivalent value of Rp40 billion to the petitioner, which according to that statement was related to the legal issues of Jiwasraya and/or ASABRI,” said sole judge Richard Edwin Basoeki during the reading of the pretrial ruling at the South Jakarta District Court on Thursday.
The judge stated that the police had obtained statements from a number of witnesses regarding Febrie’s relationship and communication with parties connected to the Jiwasraya and/or ASABRI cases before conducting the search.
Furthermore, Tan Kian’s statement was cited regarding the handover of Rp40 billion to Febrie. The money was given in Singapore dollars.
“Statements regarding the request for a sum of money, statements regarding the handover of Singapore dollar currency with an equivalent value of approximately Rp40 billion, as well as letters, documents and transaction and communication data which, according to investigators, are mutually consistent,” the judge said.
The judge emphasised that the mention of this evidence did not mean the judge was declaring the witness statement about the handover of money to be true or that the petitioner was proven to have committed a criminal offence. The assessment at the pretrial stage was only to determine whether, before the action was taken, there was an objective basis allowing for an exception to the Attorney General’s permit.
The judge considered that witness statements directly describing the request and handover of money, if obtained before the search and consistent with other documents or information, along with expert testimony explaining the events described by those witnesses, formally met the characteristics of sufficient preliminary evidence.
This was for the purpose of applying Constitutional Court Decision Number 15/PUU-XXIII/2025, namely that the Attorney General’s permit requirement under Article 8 paragraph 5 and Article 35 paragraph 1 letter e of the Prosecution Service Law no longer applies if a prosecutor is caught red-handed or involved in a serious crime.
“Considering that because the objective requirements for the exception were available and the criminal offence under investigation is a special crime, the absence of the Attorney General’s permit does not automatically render the search of premises related to the petitioner unlawful,” the judge said.
“Considering that in a pretrial hearing, the judge is not permitted to continue the examination to the point of determining whether Tan Kian’s statement is true,” he added.
In this pretrial hearing, Febrie is the petitioner. The respondents are the Metro Jaya Regional Police and the Police Corruption Eradication Corps (Kortas Tipikor Polri), with the Attorney General’s Office (Kejagung) as a co-respondent.
In addition to this pretrial hearing, Febrie has also filed a second pretrial motion with case registration number 135/Pid.Pra/2026/PB JKT.SEL. This pretrial classification concerns the legality of the forced measure of naming a suspect.
The respondent in this pretrial hearing is the Attorney General cq the Junior Attorney General for Special Crimes at the Attorney General’s Office. The ruling hearing for this pretrial motion will be held on Friday (28/8).