Lighter Sentence: Judge Reveals Mitigating Factors for Nadiem's Former Consultant Ibam
The panel of judges at the Corruption Court (Tipikor) of the Central Jakarta District Court has sentenced former consultant to ex-Minister of Education, Culture, Research, and Technology Nadiem Anwar Makarim, Ibrahim Arief alias Ibam, to four years’ imprisonment and a fine of Rp500 million subsidiary 120 days’ imprisonment.
This verdict is far lighter than the prosecutors’ demand for Ibam to be punished with 15 years’ imprisonment, a fine of Rp1 billion subsidiary 190 days’ imprisonment, and restitution of Rp16.92 billion subsidiary seven years and six months’ imprisonment.
In their considerations, the judges revealed several mitigating circumstances for Ibam.
Among them, he has never been sentenced before and was in the position of a technology consultant providing technical input—not the main policy designer in the Chromebook ICT procurement—thus his structural role differs from public officials who set strategic policies.
“The defendant has not been proven to have received direct fund flows from the ICT procurement to himself,” said the chief judge of the panel, Purwanto S Abdullah, during the verdict reading session at the Jakarta Corruption Court on Tuesday (12/5).
Meanwhile, the aggravating factors are that Ibam’s actions do not support the state’s programme for clean and KKN-free governance.
Ibam’s actions have caused significant financial losses to the state for the 2020-2021 fiscal year.
Furthermore, the actions were carried out in the education sector during the COVID-19 pandemic, resulting in double impacts: financial losses to the state and hindrance to mapping the quality of education for Indonesian children.
Based on the legal facts revealed in the trial, the judges stated that Ibam, as a consultant in the Ministry of Education, Culture, Research, and Technology, was proven guilty of causing financial losses to the state in the corruption case of Chromebook laptop procurement for the 2020-2022 fiscal year.
This case was decided by chief judge Purwanto S. Abdullah with member judges Sunoto, Eryusman, Mardiantos, and Andi Saputra.
Member judges Eryusman and Andi Saputra hold dissenting opinions. Both view that Ibam should not be sentenced guilty because the elements of the charged offence are not fulfilled.
These differing opinions, among others, highlight Ibam’s background of having no relationship with other witnesses in the Ministry of Education and Culture before the time of the criminal act or tempus delicti occurred.
Ibam is also said not to have been proven to have approached or lobbied internal parties in the Ministry of Education and Culture who were authorised regarding budget planning.
The Chromebook price proposed by Ibam, according to Andi, only referred to sales on the marketplace and was in the nature of a recommendation.
The judges’ verdict has not yet gained legal force or become final because the parties have a maximum of seven working days to submit their responses.