Judge Rafid to be Questioned This Week Over Role in Daycare Little Aresha
Tais District Court Judge Rafid Ihsan Lubis is scheduled to be questioned by police this week in connection with the Daycare Little Aresha case. The examination is planned for 12 June.
“We have scheduled his questioning for the 12th. We issued a summons previously, but he requested a postponement to the 12th due to other commitments,” said Jogja Police Criminal Investigation Unit Head Commissioner Riski Adrian after a reconstruction at Little Aresha in Umbulharjo, Jogja City, on Tuesday (9/6/2026).
Meanwhile, the questioning of Dr Cahyaningrum Dewojati, an active lecturer at UGM’s Faculty of Cultural Sciences, reportedly took place two weeks ago. During that police interview, it emerged that Cahyaningrum has a family relationship with the foundation’s chairwoman, Diyah Kusumastuti, also known as DK.
“Indeed, they have a family relationship with the foundation chairwoman, a close family connection,” Adrian stated. In her clarification, the UGM lecturer also claimed that her name had been misused. Police have also checked her bank statements. “We have also obtained her bank statements, and indeed there is nothing that points to her involvement. So far, we have not found any,” he revealed.
Judge Rafid Ihsan Lubis’s name came to the fore because he served as Chairman of the Board of Trustees for the Little Aresha Daycare Foundation in Jogja. In his clarification, Rafid claimed he was not involved and had merely lent his name.
Rafid’s clarification was delivered by Tais District Court spokesperson Rohmat, accompanied by Information and Documentation Management Officer Harry Puteratama and Public Relations staff member Farrel Alanda Fitrah, as seen on the official marinews.mahkamahagung.go.id website. Rohmat provided an explanation based on the judge’s own clarification.
In his statement, Rafid explained that his name had been included in the foundation’s structure since 2021. He said he was asked for help by two founders of the foundation, Nga Liem and Ibu Diah, for the purpose of establishing the daycare business as a legal entity.
“At one point, Saudara Nga Liem and Ibu Diah mentioned they had a running childcare business that was not yet a legal entity,” Rohmat said, reading Rafid’s clarification.
Rafid ultimately provided his personal identity documents to assist. However, he claimed he had asked for his name to be removed from the management structure once the legal entity was formed, as he was in the process of taking a civil servant (CPNS) test and had passed.
In his explanation, Rafid also asserted he was never involved in the foundation’s management. He denied receiving any compensation, providing capital, or participating in operational and decision-making processes.
“In the process of establishing the foundation, the person concerned did not know and was never informed about the issuance of the notarial deed. The person concerned never appeared before or signed the notarial deed. The person concerned also never granted power of attorney to anyone for that legal action,” Rohmat stated.
Rafid acknowledged that lending his personal identity documents was a negligence. He offered apologies to the victims, their families, and to the Supreme Court institution. “The person concerned also expressed deep regret, and this situation serves as a lesson for him personally,” Rohmat added.