Nadiem's Camp Protests Tax Expert from Prosecutors Lacking Qualifications in Taxation
The camp of former Minister of Education, Culture, Research, and Technology Nadiem Anwar Makarim has lodged a protest because the tax expert presented by the prosecutors in the trial lacks qualifications related to taxation. Nadiem’s camp has questioned the administrative requirements for an expert in the trial as stipulated in Article 1 number 51 of the new Criminal Procedure Code.
The expert presented by the prosecutors is Meidijati, a tax expert from the Directorate General of Taxes (DJP) of the Ministry of Finance (Kemenkeu). Meidijati serves as Head of the Subdirectorate of General Tax Provisions and Forced Collection of Taxes at the DJP Kemenkeu.
“With permission, Your Honour, as we have explained earlier, the advocate has outlined in accordance with the Criminal Procedure Code Article 1 Number 51, which limitatively regulates the requirements to be an expert. The first is having knowledge in a specific field proven by an academic degree or certain certificate. As explained earlier, the expert does not have any degree or academic certificate related to taxation,” said Nadiem’s lawyer, Dodi S Abdulkadir, at the Central Jakarta Corruption Court on Monday (30/3/2026).
“Then in point b, ‘and/or special experience and skills related to the criminal incident’. Well, the criminal incident here is digitalisation in the field of education. Well, the expert also did not mention any experience in the field of educational digitalisation,” Dodi added.
The prosecutors stated that Meidjiati has received an assignment letter from the DJP Kemenkeu to serve as an expert in the trial of the alleged corruption case involving the procurement of Chromebook laptops and Chrome Device Management (CDM). The prosecutors said Meidijati will explain the Annual Tax Return (SPT) of PT Gojek Indonesia related to Nadiem in the indictment.
Nadiem’s camp stated that Meidijati does not meet the qualifications for legality and legal standing as an expert in the trial. The judge asked Nadiem’s camp to first listen to Meidijati’s testimony in the trial.
“Very well, advocates. So naturally, the Public Prosecutor, the advocates, and the Panel of Judges each have their own assessments. Later, the advocates can assess through their plea, the Prosecutor through the indictment, and the Panel of Judges through the verdict. Whether this expert testimony correlates with this case, we will each assess it,” said the chief judge of the panel, Purwanto S Abdullah.
“That’s why we listen to the testimony first, because certainly the Director General of Taxes also assigns the person in relation to their duties and functions. That’s it. Whether certified or what, certainly with their position we can assess it later,” the judge added.
The prosecutors asked the judge to note Nadiem’s camp’s protest as an objection in the trial. The judge mediated the debate and asked Meidijati and the prosecutors to focus only on explaining the tax SPT that serves as evidence in this case.
“So regarding this, we will all assess it later. Earlier at the beginning, we said, please assess whether the testimony or opinion of the expert to be given later correlates with this case or not. Please. So we don’t need to debate it here, we examine it first then we will assess it. That’s it,” said the judge.
“I think that’s enough for the Public Prosecutor and the advocates. Very well. We agree not to go beyond the matters mentioned earlier. Because this is submitted based on the SPT, certainly there. It might not be too long. Please, we give the opportunity to the Public Prosecutor,” the judge continued.
In this case, Nadiem is charged with corruption related to the procurement of Chromebook laptops during his tenure as Minister of Education, Culture, Research, and Technology. The project is said to have caused state losses of Rp 2.1 trillion.
Nadiem has filed an exception. The judge rejected the exception and requested the trial to proceed to the proof stage.