Karo District Attorney Explains Amsal Sitepu Corruption Case at DPR Commission III Meeting

The Head of the Karo District Prosecutor’s Office, Danke Rajagukguk, explained the reasons for detaining Amsal Christy Sitepu—recently acquitted—in the corruption case involving the production of village profile videos in Karo Regency. Danke stated that his office was still referring to the old Criminal Procedure Code (KUHAP).

This was conveyed by Danke during a working meeting and public hearing with DPR Commission III at the parliamentary complex in Senayan, Jakarta, on Thursday (2 April 2026). Danke explained that the old KUHAP was used because the detention process occurred in 2025.

“According to us, the basis for detaining Mr Amsal is Article 21 of the old KUHAP, where Amsal was detained from 19 November 2025 to 8 December 2025,” said Danke.

Danke explained that Amsal’s designation as a suspect was based on allegations of markup practices in the village profile video production project. According to him, one of the methods used was asking village heads to prepare a budget plan (RAB) for equipment rental over 30 days.

“The legal facts obtained in the trial show that the activity was not carried out for 30 days, so the expert concluded that the rental payment should be according to the actual duration of the activity,” said Danke.

Additionally, he stated that Amsal created a budget item for video production worth Rp9 million. However, Amsal was accused of separately including components for editing, cutting, and dubbing.

“Amsal then added budget items for editing, cutting, and dubbing, each worth Rp1 million, where according to the expert, editing, cutting, and dubbing are the same as video production design, so the cutting, editing, and dubbing were considered as losses,” he explained.

At the same opportunity, Chairman of DPR Commission III, Habiburokhman, highlighted the delay by the Karo District Attorney in following the process for suspending Amsal’s detention. Habiburokhman emphasised that everyone has the right to freedom.

“Then it was also explained why it took so long to come to Tanjung Gusta, even though we know, Ma’am, that freedom is a principle. If there’s traffic, don’t take 5 hours; even 5 minutes, if someone has the right to be released from detention, we must carry it out. Please explain, Ma’am, what the obstacles were that caused the delay in coming to Tanjung Gusta?” asked Habib.

In response, Danke cited distance as a factor. He said the prosecutor had to travel from Karo Regency to Medan, which takes about two hours.

“With permission from the leadership, regarding the distance, because the executing prosecutor to the Medan District Court comes from Karo to Medan, approximately 2 hours, leadership,” answered Danke.

Amsal Sitepu’s Story about the ‘Brownies’

At that opportunity, Amsal also revealed the chronology of the case that ensnared him. Amsal claimed he experienced intimidation during his detention.

Amsal said he had undergone 131 days of detention at the Class I Medan Detention Centre before being released. He explained that during the initial examination, he was offered to become an expert witness regarding the production of village profile videos.

“I was offered to become an expert witness because he said Amsal is the one who best understands how to make village profile videos,” said Amsal.

“There was also an offer to make a profile video for the Karo District Prosecutor’s Office. But I didn’t agree because of some reasons that I have already mentioned, and I only agreed to review the investigation process that I uploaded on my TikTok account, Sir,” he continued.

According to him, the designation was based on alleged state losses reported by the Karo Regency Inspectorate. However, he claimed he was never examined by the audit agency.

Amsal then touched on the alleged intimidation he experienced during detention. He said he was visited by prosecutor Wira Arizona on 1 December 2025, who gave him brownies while suggesting not to use a lawyer and to follow the legal process.

“On 1 December 2025, the one who visited me was Mr Wira Arizona, giving me a box of chocolate brownies with the words, ‘Come on, Bang, no need to make a fuss, just go with the flow. Why bother using a lawyer? We’ll help with the indictment. There’s someone disturbed.’ Something like that, leadership,” explained Amsal.

Amsal emphasised that he chose to fight and uphold justice. He said he rejected the intimidation.

“But I just smiled there. I said, ‘No, I will continue to fight.’ That’s it, leadership, and that’s the brief chronology up to the incident with the chocolate brownies,” he said.

Prosecutor Denies Intimidation

Wira, who was also present at the meeting, then denied the allegations of intimidation against Amsal. Wira explained the chronology of his visit to Tanjung Gusta Detention Centre for Amsal’s examination agenda.

“I will explain the chronology regarding the alleged intimidation mentioned. First, I will explain the arrival at Tanjung Gusta for the suspect Amsal’s examination agenda, where we had previously coordinated with Amsal’s lawyer,” he said.

Wira emphasised that there was no intention on his part to intimidate. Wira said his presence at the detention centre had been coordinated with Amsal’s legal counsel, although the lawyer was unable to attend at that time.

“So from there, there was no intention at all from us to intimidate. Because we had also coordinated with Amsal’s lawyer to be present at Tanjung Gusta, to meet at Tanjung Gusta for the examination,” he said.

Wira also explained that he did not come alone, but with two other team members. He emphasised that the giving of brownies to Amsal was not done directly by him and was not accompanied by the conversation as alleged.

“It was also witnessed that the handover was not from my hand, but from my staff’s hand, and there was no conversation,” he said.

Wira stated that the action was purely based on