Nadiem: Why Aren't All Ministers Imprisoned for Enriching Others During Procurements?

JAKARTA, KOMPAS.com - Former Minister of Education, Culture, Research, and Technology Nadiem Makarim questioned why not all ministers are made suspects if there are parties—such as vendors—that are enriched or gain profits in ministerial procurements.

Nadiem posed the question to Prof Romli Atmasasmita, a criminal law expert from Padjadjaran University, who was presented as a mitigating expert in the alleged corruption case involving Chromebook laptop procurements.

“May I ask Prof Romli, why aren’t all ministers imprisoned for enriching others if every procurement surely involves profits?” Nadiem asked during the trial at the Jakarta Corruption Court, on Monday (4/5/2026).

Romli stated that a procurement can be categorised as corruption only if it also involves unlawful acts.

“Because not all ministers commit unlawful acts,” Romli replied.

Referring to the old Criminal Code, namely Article 2 of Anti-Corruption Law No. 31 of 1999, which addresses unlawful acts of enriching oneself or a corporation.

Article 3 emphasises the misuse of authority by public officials or civil servants.

These two articles are recorded in the new Criminal Code as Articles 603 and 604.

“Unless there is a relationship between the vendor and the minister, such as feedback,” said Romli.

However, allegations of bribes or feedback must be proven by the public prosecutors (JPU). In addition, the JPU must prove the impact of the criminal act in terms of state losses.

“There is state loss or not. If there is none, then there is no corruption,” said Romli.

In this case, former Minister of Education, Culture, Research, and Technology Nadiem Makarim, along with three other defendants, are said to have caused state financial losses amounting to Rp 2.1 trillion.

Nadiem is charged with enriching himself by Rp 809 billion. This figure is said to stem from Google’s investment in Gojek or PT AKAB.