Indobuildco Files Complaint with Judicial Commission Over Hotel Sultan Execution

PT Indobuildco’s legal counsel has filed a complaint with the Judicial Commission regarding Hotel Sultan, naming the Head of Jakarta Central District Court and the Head of Jakarta High Court as respondents.

“Today, we filed a complaint with the Judicial Commission concerning Hotel Sultan. The respondents are the Head of Jakarta Central District Court and the Head of Jakarta High Court,” stated Hamdan Zoelva, legal counsel for PT Indobuildco, on Thursday (12 March).

Hamdan contended that there was discriminatory treatment by the courts towards Indobuildco compared with the State Secretariat Ministry (Kemensetneg) and the Jakarta Sports Palace Management Agency (PPK GBK) regarding the execution of court decisions. The Hotel Sultan dispute is still being processed at the appellate level with potential cassation proceedings ahead. Yet the court continued to process execution steps upon the plaintiff’s request—the State Secretariat Ministry.

“This clearly demonstrates differential treatment before the law,” Hamdan said.

Hamdan explained that long before the issuance of Decision No. 208/Pdt.G/2025/PN.Jkt.Pst, there was a provisional ruling No. 667/Pdt.G/2023/PN.Jkt.Pst dated 24 January 2024, which ordered Kemensetneg and PPK GBK to halt all activities in the Hotel Sultan area pending a final court decision. However, this provisional ruling remained unexecuted for months. On 29 October 2024, Jakarta Central District Court refused to enforce the provisional ruling, citing lack of authorisation from the Jakarta High Court’s presiding judge.

By contrast, when Kemensetneg and PPK GBK sought execution of the immediately executable decision No. 208/Pdt.G/2025/PN.Jkt.Pst dated 28 November 2025, approval was granted swiftly, resulting in an execution order and first written warning (aanmaning) on 26 January 2026. A second warning is scheduled for 9 February 2026, with a site inspection scheduled for 16 March.

“There is an immediately executable decision that is currently under appeal proceedings, with our case being examined at the appellate level and cassation to follow,” Hamdan stated. “Yet the district court is forcing execution at the plaintiff’s request—Kemensetneg—despite the case being contested at appeal and cassation stages.”

According to Hamdan, this violates Supreme Court Circular (SEMA) No. 4 of 2001, which establishes conditions for executing immediately executable decisions.

“Under Supreme Court Circular No. 4 of 2001, it is explicitly clear that immediately executable decisions cannot be enforced,” he said.

Hamdan stressed that the complaint to the Judicial Commission was filed due to serious procedural violations in the planned execution.

“There is a serious procedural breach affecting judicial function. The court cannot simply claim this is a technical judicial matter—it is a violation requiring the Judicial Commission’s attention,” he said.

Additionally, various legal objections have been raised by multiple parties, including hotel management and tenants. Hamdan argued these objections should be considered before execution proceeds.

Hamdan confirmed that execution has not yet occurred, but the court has issued warning letters instructing the hotel to vacate voluntarily.

“Execution has not happened yet, but there are orders to vacate voluntarily, which we have rejected,” he concluded.

Earlier, PPK GBK opened a Service Post for Block 15 GBK Management to protect employees, vendors, and tenants potentially affected by the Hotel Sultan execution process.

Rakhmadi Afif Kusumo, President Director of PPK GBK, stated that the government plans to transform Block 15 into an integrated green public space, reinforced by a new MRT station to enhance public accessibility. The service post opening aims to address concerns of those involved in Hotel Sultan operations regarding the land clearing process, which is based on the Jakarta Central District Court’s Civil Decision No. 208/Pdt.G/2025/PN.Jkt.Pst, which is immediately executable.

Kharis Sucipto, PPK GBK’s legal counsel, explained that administrative manoeuvres cannot prevent the execution of immediately executable civil court decisions.

“Regarding this case, no legal rule or Supreme Court guideline states that an administrative court decision can annul or delay the execution of an immediately executable civil court decision. Therefore, this execution preparation process is lawful and part of enforcing legal certainty,” Kharis said during a press conference in Jakarta on Tuesday (3 February).