Nadiem's Camp Requests Judge to Summon Google Representatives and Former Education Ministry Secretary-General to Hearing
JAKARTA, KOMPAS.com - The camp of former Minister of Education, Culture, Research, and Technology Nadiem Makarim has requested the panel of judges to summon six witnesses from the case investigation report (BAP) for examination in the trial concerning the alleged procurement of Chromebook-based laptops.
“Regarding the request we just received through PTSP from Nadiem’s legal advisory team, which petitions the panel to present witnesses Iwan Syahril, Dr. Ainun Na’im AKT, Olivia Husli Basrin, Putri Ratu Alam, Kausar Anggakara, Hendrik Tio,” stated the Chief Judge of the Panel, Purwanto S Abdullah, during the hearing at the Jakarta Corruption Court on Monday (13/4/2026).
Iwan Syahril was the Special Staff to the Minister of Education on Learning matters from 2019-2020.
Ainun Na’im served as Secretary-General of the Ministry of Education, Culture, Research, and Technology from 2019-2021.
Putri Ratu Alam held the position of Director of Government Relations and Public Policy at PT Google Indonesia.
Kausar Anggakara was a Senior Fixed-Term Contract Worker Designer at the Digital Business Directorate of PT Telkom in 2020-2021.
Hendrik Tio is the Director of PT Bhinneka Mentari Dimensi, one of the Chromebook suppliers.
After reading the request letter from the defendant’s camp, Judge Purwanto questioned why these six witnesses had not yet been summoned and examined in the trial, particularly Putri Ratu Alam and Hendrik Tio.
The Public Prosecutor (JPU) stated that these names were not called because the testimonies of other witnesses were already sufficient to prove the criminal act committed.
“We assess that for Mr Nadiem’s case, the evidence we have presented is already sufficient, Your Honour. Because we are convinced by that evidence,” said the Head of the JPU Team, Roy Riady.
Hendrik Tio and Putri Ratu Alam had previously been examined in relation to three other defendants’ cases.
The panel of judges then asked the defendant’s camp for the reasons why these six witnesses needed to be presented in the trial.
Nadiem’s lawyer, Radhie Noviandi Yusuf, emphasised that the testimonies of these six witnesses were necessary because they directly related to several matters alleged by the prosecutors.
For example, Putri Ratu Alam would be asked to explain the meeting between Nadiem and Google representatives in February 2020.
“So, our hope is that since Putri Ratu Alam was reportedly present there, as the initial manifestation of the offence in February, we think the panel should hear it. If not, that’s fine, but we would gladly say it’s not proven then,” said Radhie.
Radhie stated that the testimonies from Putri Ratu Alam and others would lighten Nadiem’s position.
The panel of judges had no issue with presenting the witnesses as long as it did not exceed the determined schedule.