Feeling Response Cut Off by Prosecutor, Nadiem: I'm Not Finished Yet, Sir

The trial was held at the Jakarta Corruption Court on Monday (11/5/2026). Initially, the prosecutor asked about the full authority of a minister in making decisions on budget use for Chromebook procurement. “Do you fully understand the policy for deciding a programme, in the Education Directorate, that it is entirely within your authority as minister?” asked the prosecutor. “Is that a question?” replied Nadiem. “Yes,” said the prosecutor. “Clearly not,” answered Nadiem. Nadiem then explained that regarding ministry administration, all procurements and technical functions had been delegated to the relevant Director General. He stated that from previous eras of the Minister of Education, Culture, Research, and Technology, no minister had ever signed off on laptop or ICT specifications. “So one thing I very much regret in this trial is the creation of obfuscation, the creation of confusion about who actually has the authority. Not opinion, fact from the signer regarding the policy on specifications, whether Chrome or Windows, is not at the ministerial level, it is at the director level,” said Nadiem. “According to you, who decides the policy?” interjected the prosecutor. “I am not finished answering the prosecutor’s question. Please let me finish, then the prosecutor can ask the next question,” replied Nadiem. Nadiem then continued his explanation. He said that in 2020, there was a decree from the Director General and a decree from the Director stating that the specification change was the result of a technical team conducted under the Director General level. He mentioned that the minister at that time did not sign documentation on specifications, appointment of the technical team, studies, or anything related to the procurement of Chromebook laptops at the Ministry of Education, Culture, Research, and Technology during his tenure. “What is always brought up by the prosecutor is that I signed the Ministerial Regulation on DAK (Special Allocation Funds). Where I am not responsible for the procurement carried out by local governments or I am not the budget user in that procurement. So this is one of the fatal errors in the legal construction of the charges against me, Mr Prosecutor,” revealed Nadiem. Hearing Nadiem’s statement, the prosecutor then asked Nadiem to only speak about what was asked by the prosecutor. Nadiem and the prosecutor exchanged retorts. “I remind you, Mr Nadiem, just answer my questions, because every word of your answer I note word for word,” clarified the prosecutor. “It should be like that,” said Nadiem. “Because there are aggravating and mitigating factors, like that,” explained the prosecutor. “Please, Mr Prosecutor, I am only stating the truth,” replied Nadiem. “Your version,” retorted the prosecutor. “So let me finish,” replied Nadiem. “What is the question, the answer goes everywhere,” interjected the prosecutor.