KPK Urges Judge to Reject Pre-Trial Suit by Former Religious Affairs Minister Yaqut Cholil Qoumas

JAKARTA, KOMPAS.com - The Corruption Eradication Commission (KPK) has asked the panel of judges to deny the pretrial lawsuit filed by former Religious Affairs Minister Yaqut Cholil Qoumas. The request was conveyed during the reading of the respondent’s answer to case number 19/Pid.Pra/2026/PN JKT.SEL at the South Jakarta District Court, on Wednesday (4 March 2026). In its plea, the KPK asked the judges to accept and grant the respondent’s plea in its entirety. “Declare the applicant’s petition as error in object. State that the petition is unclear, obscure (obscuur libel),” said the KPK Legal Bureau Team in the hearing. On the merits of the case, the KPK also asked the panel of judges to accept and grant the respondent’s answer in full. The KPK also requested that the court declare the suspect designation of the petitioner to be valid and lawful, and to declare the respondent authorised to conduct the investigation into the case in question. “Declare that the investigations conducted by the respondent are lawful and based on the law. Order the applicant to pay the costs arising from the proceedings brought by him. Or if the Panel of Judges holds a different view, please render the most fair decision,” he asserted. In its answer, the KPK explained that the handling of the alleged corruption case related to Indonesia’s Hajj quota in the administration of the Hajj pilgrimage for 2023–2024 at the Ministry of Religious Affairs of the Republic of Indonesia began from public information. The KPK also emphasised that the case continues to apply the provisions of the old Criminal Procedure Code (KUHAP). That refers to transitional provisions in Law Number 20 of 2025 on KUHAP which took effect on 2 January 2026. Referring to Article 361 paragraph a of KUHAP 2025, cases still in the investigation or prosecution stage when the new law comes into effect shall continue to be resolved under Law No. 8 of 1981 on Criminal Procedure (KUHAP 1981). Furthermore, the KPK explained that the object of praperadilan is set out in Article 1(10) in conjunction with Article 77 KUHAP 1981 and expanded by Constitutional Court Decision No. 21/PUU-XII/2014, which covers the validity of suspect designation, searches, and seizures. According to the KPK, the applicant’s arguments, including those related to the suspect designation letter, the notice of designation of the suspect, the authority of the KPK leadership in appointing a suspect, the computation of state losses, and the application of criminal procedure law, do not constitute objects of praperadilan because they lie outside the formal aspects within the jurisdiction of the pretrial judge. “Arguments that do not fall within the scope of the pretrial or lie outside the formal aspects within the authority of the pretrial judge,” he explained. The KPK stressed that the suspect designation letter and the notice of designation of the suspect are administrative documents in the investigative process and do not constitute coercive measures, and thus cannot be used as the object of a pretrial.